IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


k 
^ 


^O 


^  .<^k.. 


/- 


f/i 


% 


1.0 


M 

2.2 


1.1     f^liS 

IIIU 


IL25  nil  1.4 


1.6 


V] 


<^ 


/^ 


A- 


om 


m 


^'^/M  o'. 


J 


rnoragpapnic 

Sciences 
Corporation 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER  N.Y.  14580 

(716)  872-4503 


4? 


W 


^ 


•^ 


Si^ 


yf. 


^ 


^"\  ^\ 


SS\       -^    ^^  »£■ 


^ 

^ 

^ 


'^1.>* 


^^^ 


^^» 


CIMM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  Institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  tachniquos  at  bibliographiquas 


Tha  Instituta  has  attamptad  to  obtain  the  bast 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  altar  any  of  the  images  in  tha 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


n 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 


r~~|    Covers  damaged/ 


Couverture  endommag^ 

Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaur^  «t/ou  pellicula 

Cover  title  missing/ 

Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 

Coloured  maps/ 

Cartes  gAographiques  en  couleur 

Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bieue  ou  noire) 

Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/'ou  illustrations  en  couleur 

Bound  with  other  material/ 
Reiii  avMc  d'autres  documents 


D 


n 


n 


Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  re  liure  serree  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distorsion  le  long  da  la  margM  intirieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
It  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajouties 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  la  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  itait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6ti  filmias. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppldmentaires: 


L'Institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  iti  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  paut-dtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliogr%phique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exigar  una 
modification  dans  la  mithoda  normaie  de  filmage 
sont  indiquAs  ci-dassous. 


I      I    Coloured  pages/ 


D 


Pages  de  couleur 

Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommagies 

Pages  restored  and/oi 

Pages  restaur^es  et/ou  pelliculies 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxei 
Pages  d6coior^es,  tachet^es  ou  piqu^es 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  ddtachdes 

Showthroughy 
Transparence 

Quality  of  prir 

Quality  inAgale  de  {'impression 

Includes  supplementary  materii 
Comprend  du  material  supplementaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Sauls  Edition  disponible 


r~~l  Pages  damaged/ 

|~~]  Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 

r~Tj  Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 

I      I  Pages  detached/ 

r7]  Showthrough/ 

I      I  Quality  of  print  varies/ 

I      I  Includes  supplementary  material/ 

rn  Only  edition  available/ 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc..  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalament  ou  partiellenient 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata.  une  pelure. 
etc.,  ont  6x6  filmies  d  nouveau  de  facon  6 
obtanir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 
Ce  document  est  film*  au  taux  de  rMuction  indiqui  ci-dessous. 
10X  1«X  18X  22X 


12X 


16X 


20X 


26X 


30X 


/ 


2^^X 


28X 


32X 


The  copy  filmed  hore  hat  bean  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of:' 

L^lslature  du  Quebec 
Qu6bec 

The  images  eppearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  frort  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  •— »■  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 


L'exemplsire  filmA  fut  reproduit  grftce  d  la 
g^niroeitA  de: 

Legislature  du  Quebec 
Quebec 

Les  images  suivantes  ont  6ti  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  !a  condition  et 
de  la  nettetA  de  I'exemplaire  film*,  et  en 
uonformitA  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 

Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprimte  sont  f  llmAs  en  commenpant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
derniire  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impress!on  ou  d'illustratlon,  soit  par  ie  second 
plat,  salon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  filmte  en  commenpant  par  la 
premiere  page  qui  comporto  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  dee  symboles  suivants  apparaftra  sur  la 
dernidre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  ie  symbols  — *-  signifie  "A  SUIVRE".  ie 
symbole  V  signifie  "FIN". 


Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  ar9  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  dtre 
filmte  d  dee  taux  de  reduction  diffirents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  cilchA,  il  est  filmi  A  partir 
de  Tangle  supirieur  gauche,  de  gauche  i  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  n^cessaire.  Las  diagrammes  suivants 
iliustrent  la  mithode. 


1 

2 

3 

1 

2 

* 

3 

4 

5 

6 

^mffmviTxy'w^'^^'T?^    ■■■  ^r?w^r!Wi«r5»-*  h'/W'  >, 


X 


Bill,  u  imiBiiw.wii.iiiimi    ^-^ 


'!'j:j>,»!|igiiiiL,ijroJu.i  j.ii 


■!HWHBIWIII!lilMI!iKi|i  ittmmmmm 


THE 


INDIRECT  CLAIMS 


OF  THK   UNITED   STATES, 


VNDEB  TUE 


-BY- 


l\ 


WILLIAM  r.EACll  LAWRF.M'E,  LL.  D. 

..„ «.,iirA-iv»v   AND  OF  THE       COMMESTAIRB 


\ 


•  •< 


pnoVIDKXCE: 
SIDNEY  S.  KlUKU  ^    DKOTHER. 


*^ 


^ 


TREATY   OF    WASHINGTON 

OF    MAY    8,    18  71, 

A8  SUnMITTED  TO  THE  THIiaNAI    OF  A.UUTRAT.ON   AT  «ENE.'A. 


■Hf 


II 


■^PIET-*-- 


i4*'l!SSfc.-. 


■■•»*««i*wi*w<i»»««a.-t,.- 


i- 


«v  WILLIAM  .EACH  LAWREN'OE         ' 


i\ 


\ 


\ 


X. 


s 


-^^ 


-♦^. 


%^ 


\ 


\ 


•■"«.■"■ 


INTRODUCTION 


N 


Our  letters  to  the  Provideuce  Journal,  on  the  subject  of  Indirect  damaf/fs, 
foiindtMl  on  tJie  provision  for  the  Alabama  claims,  generically  so  called,  under 
the  treaty  of  Witshingtoii,  of  May  Stli,  1871,  sufficiently  explain  the  motives 
which  induced  their  preparation.  It  was  intended,  in  consenuence  of  numer- 
ous requests  for  copies  of  these  pajiers,  to  reprint  them  in  pamphlet  form.  But, 
though  they  wore  put  in  type  immediately  after  their  ap|)earance  in  the 
Journal,  other  engagomenta  have  hitherto  prevented  the  revision  of  the  proof 
sheets.  In  the  meantime,  the  subject  has  happily  lust  the  interest  incident 
to  a  ci.ntrovcrsy  i)ending  between  two  great  nations,  the  influence  of  which 
WHS  daily  felt  in  the  fluctuations  of  the  Stock  Kxchange.  The  indirect  claims, 
however,  must  ever  constitute  an  interesting  episode  in  diplomatic  history, 
whether  we  re)ianl  the  unadvisi-d  presentation  of  them  by  the  United  S>Utes, 
the  course  adopted  in  relation  to  thi'm  by  Lngla^d,  the  protracted  negotia- 
tions lii'twei-n  the  two  governments  to  device  a  mode  fur  thei"-  aband(^nnient, 
or  whether  we  take  into  view  the  iniervention  of  the  arbitrators,  who,  availing 
themselves  6f  a  motion  of  adjiuirnment,  in  anticipation  of  any  regular  judg- 
ment, and  without  ileciding  the  nuestion  of  their  own  jurisdiction,  removed 
these  claims  from  the   records  of  the  tribunal. 

We  give,  having  receivetl  the  lust  publications  of  the  two  governments, 
incluiling  the  recent  proceedings  of  the  Arbitrators  at  Geneva,  a  rapid 
synopsis  of  what  occurred  subsequent  to  the  date  of  our  communications  to 
the  Jinnnal. 

It  has  been  deemed  expedient  to  precede  the  claims  for  indirfrt  losses, 
by  a  letter,  wliich  was  originally  prepared  for  the  New  York  World,  wliile  Uie 
treaty  itself  was  slill  before  the  Senate.  It  was  alsti  piiblishe.:  in  the/oKniu/. 
This  letter  will  not  only  show  that  our  views  on  the  nature  and  oliject  of 
the  convention,  formed  before  a  discussion  respecting  its  meaning  hail  arisen, 
were  the  same  as  we  have  ever  since  maintaint>d,  but  it  will  serve  to  eluci- 
date the  points  in  controversy. 


jJ^ttff^^ 


^9^*^^^lf^tf^h^: 


W: 


w^ 


w     I- 


I 


^x 


4 

The  "  Aiiiprlcan  case,"  which  riiniain,,.!  >i  ^ 
«e„toc,  .,  ,he  Arbitnu.,.:!'!. :.::''  ^J-l;*;;-^'*;  -<-,  wa,  pre 
to  a  telegraphic  i„ti,„atl,.n  fro,,,  0,.,...ral  .Sche,  cL    .,    ".       '  "T  l'"''    ^''""«'' 
Fl.h  ha.l  n.plie.l  tl.a,,  "  ,h..,e  ..u.st  ^^  ,.    S       "'f  "'' "^  ^"bmary.  .Mr. 
claims  p„.o..te.ir  it  i,  i,.  a  ,.o,o  Tr o, ^ /    ,  \t," n;    '^^  T  "'*''' 

of  the. i,!  of  ,!.„,  ,„,„„1,.  ti.at  we  (i,.,|  the     r,/.   r  '"•"'*'  ■^*^''""'^'*' 

Cal-ns  I,.  .,|p,..„.,ue  cor'respo..:.;;:.'  'u    '2:^"  "*""^' '"'  ^"^'  """-'=' 

THb!;:L^?!::s:;s:~r;:iS :-  '^ »"'  r""'- "-  '-'^"-  '^^  «•- 

and  hUuries.  p.u  fi.rwanM,   Z"  '  '^  iirfl^'l^'Tf  "^  "^^  """-'  losses 
I"  the  tra,.Hfer  of  the  An.erica..  eo    me^wl  ''"""''•  '"^"'"'""^  "'«  ''«» 

enha,.cedpay,.u.,.,s„f  i„surr.rr.     ,  ;"""  '"   "'"  """^^  ila«.  the 

.d;.i..onof  aiar«esu..,t:;;rc;; '  ::c"r;'^      t  '-"* '"" 

rebellioii."  '^"'^  *'"'  •"•'   snpiiressioii  of  the 

<»!>  the  opening  of  Parliament  on  the  .1,},  of  V,.h.,. 

nou,,ci,.g  that  the  tir.,,neHin.M.f  11^1     irrf^,-^^^  "'"  '^'''"''  '"  «»■ 

1eclare.l  that  in  ,he  An,e,ic  n  cVse    the  '*'''"''"''" ''''''^^«  "^ ''«''^v«. 

opinion,  were  not  within  the  juris^li  .[i ,,  '  '  Zl  '^'■^'  ''"'""'  ^'"^•'''  '"  '"^^ 
ca..se,l  «  friendly  repre.entullou   o    ,a    ..?  f '''""•^'ors,  an.l  that  .he  I,,,,! 

of  the  l'ni,e,l  Slates.  "*'  '"^^■'•■'  '"  '''-'  '»»'•'*  '"  "««  government 

Mr.  Fish,  in  his  note  of  Fehriiarv  -'7   iHT)  . .  r - 
gard  to  the  clHi,„s  refe.re.l  to  bvTl:i  r       'm     ."'."""  '^'^'^'''^'  '^i''' '"  ^e- 
t"at  he  could  not  a.,ando        .  f.   '     ^' Z  "''V   ""l  "^7^"'""  '^  "^  """""» 
arbi.ration.-    He  thus  proceeds-         '  '""'  """*'""  ''^  »"  "«I'«'-'-al 

po^ti^'MiS^i'':^;::::;:::^:':''*' ''"'■'"  '^'*^"""-" "« "-ere,. 

a"<.  has  n..v..r  e-aertai;:,':;::  tiZ;  nL^^r*'' r''"''••'^''^-"-' 
Inoasure  ,,/  .la.nages  .•«  fin.Is  rxi.res.i  .  !  .,  "  *"'■''  •'"'  •■■^"•'vai.'ant 
Press,  and  see.ns  most  ....  !;:'':  .''r ''*■''  '-'''-.^«  <^'"-  I'ritish 
of  so.ne  even  of  „.e  s.a.esn...,.  Jlvl^  nZ!^^""  ''"^^♦'-'-'  ^'^  "-   """J» 

.;.en:;:;:i:^::;.s.r:;:::-^-----M,.r..h ., ..,  wi...  the 

"'^'  clai,ns  for  indireet   |o..s,.    a,"    of       "''•"''"'ati....  of  ,1,,.  origin  of 

answered  at  mnch  l^n-tl.  I.v'm,  f,  .  I  "',"""""  "'"'  """'•">•  This  was 
General  Sehenei.  uhiW  .  ^..^  ;„  '' j  l^""'  'J'- '"  »"  i-'n.etion  to 
'ne«sureof,i.,,n,,,,,,,,^^,.,;;;;  >    '  '  -•'''5,^-I.at  " '1'-  ."Xten,  and   the 

Trib..nal  of  A-hiu-ation  .,  (    ',^..       '    .    ^      ' "'"'  '"  "  ''•"•'^'""  ^-^   "'«^ 

^'•■''''"'-''-awa,vn,,utlH.  n  :  ;  ;  T^^  '"  ""'  '"•'"-'  ^'-"'.s;  for 
'l<'«ired  a  m„n,.y  au  u.l  „„  accoun  of  h!  '■'■"""""  "-"'"'•• -■MH-e,...!  nor 
'v-e  ,nite  as  ,n„eh  mt,.,esSro  !  ^  ^  ^  '  ?"'  """  '*'"  ^'""•"'  ^'"'«» 
a<leci.sion  a.lve,se  f.  .l.ese  elain.s      A;    l!;'','' '""''''""'''^ ''•''•■»''''' tribunal  - 


\ 


I 


!y,''',-!'?"y5''jM'»'>.ig **»----  ■■ 


i 


5 


natter,  was  pre- 
;  last.  ThoiiKh 
'  Februitry,  >Ir. 
n.V  part  of>lie 
neial  Sclu-iick, 
to  the  iiidiroct 

•oviiice  of  the 
iii'liiect  losses 
lulling'  the  loss 
ili^h  Hag,  the 
war,  and  the 
essioii  of  the 

^lopii,  in  an- 

ee  at  (Jeneva, 

^hk'h,  in  her 

lliat  she  had 

governuient 

.  says,  in  re- 
Is  of  opinion 
an  iu'part'al 

w  never  ex- 
K'ir  account, 
t'-xtravaiiant 
I"  the  Uritish 
the  minds 


■',  with  the 
It'  origin  of 
This  was 
'•notion  I,) 
III  and  the 
»e  supreme 

I  ■'■",  1-^72, 

0  General 
s  snrj>ri.>te 
'"•  I'V  the 
laini.'s;  for 
•^'ctfd  nor 
'•''I  States 

'•  triliiitidi  ■ 
ilanis  lutL 

1  there  be 


\ 


would  convince  your  Lorilsliip,  though  unotllcially,  that  he  was  entirely  oi>- 
posed  to  the  principle  of  claims  for  conse<|uential  damaKes."  He  added  :  "  Hut, 
Uuring  the  whole  conversation,  Mr  Fish  betrayeil  anxiety  that  the  treaty 
should  not  he  allowed  to  break  down,  and  fre(|uently  expressed  his  hope  that 
your  I.ordship  would  siiRRest  some  means  of  dis|M»sinK  of  the  indirect  claims, 
which  wouhl  at  the  same  time  sal isf\  Her  M.^esty's  (tovernment  and  would 
be  possible  for  that  of  the  I'nited  Slates;  for  he  said  that,  even  if  the  latter 
was  not  Justified  in  ever  having  pr(;»ented  those  claims,— which  lie  could  not 
admit,— It  was  Impossible  for  It  now  to  recede  or  withdraw  them,  unless  it 
shouhl  obtain  a  <iuid  /iro  i/no. 

"  If  Iler  Majesty's  (iovernnumt  were  really  anxious  that  the  provisions  of  the 
treaty  should  be  >  arried  out,  wliich  I  earnestly  assured  him  was  certainly  the 
case,  why,  he  asked,  shoubl  not  your  Lordsliij),  in  your  answer  to  his  despatch, 
now  on  Its  way,  stale  that, as  the  I'nited  Stales  (iovernment  had  made  it  evi- 
<lent  that  it  did  not  desin*  a  money  award  on  account  of  tin!  indirect  claims, 
but  nmrely  a  decision  on  their  merits  by  the  Tiibuiial,  Her  MaJestyS  (inv- 
ernmeiit  would  consent  never  to  present  >uch  indirect  claims,  uiiiler  similar 
circumstunces,  wlien  Knijiand  niiglit  happen  to  Ije  a  beliij^erent,  and  wo;<ld 
allow  the  abstract  <|Ueslioa  to  be  decided  for  the  benetit  of  l»otli  parties,  if 
the  United  States  <Joveriiment  would  enjjaKe  not  to  a->k  for  a  money  award 
on  the  indirect  claims,  from  the  Tribuii.il  at  Geii«!va." 

The  attempt  thus  initiated  by  Mr.  Fi>h  to  cause  the  (  bjecli<uiable  clauns 
of  th  >  U'.iteil  States  to  disappear,  without  the  ijovernment  seeming  to  with- 
tlraw  I'  Jill,  resulted,  after  various  discu>sioiis  between  Lord  tiranville  and 
<ieneral  Scheiick,  in  the  ilr.tl't,  by  the  foiinei,  at  our  re<|ues|.of  a  supplementary 
article  to  the  treaty.  As  laid  before  Parliament.  M.iy  10,  ls7;.',  it  was  in  the 
following  terms:  "Whereas  the  (Jovernment  of  Her  ISritanic  Miye.sty  has 
conteiicled  in  the  recent  corres|)i)iideiice  with  the  Government  of  the  I'liiled 
Stales,  as  follows,  namely  :  That  such  iiidiiect  ciaitU'*  a>  tli'i-e  tor  tlu'  iialiuiial 
losses  stateil  in  the  case,  piesenteil  on  ilie  part  of  the  (Government  ot  tlie  United 
Stales  to  the  Tribunal  of  Arbitration  at  Uriueva,  to  have  been  sustained  by 
the  loss  in  the  transfer  of  the  American  commercial  marine  to  the  Drilisii 
tlai{;  the  enhanced  payments  ol  iiiiuraiici' ;  the  prolonitaiion  of  Ihi'  w.ir:  and 
the  addition  of  a  lante  sum  to  ihe  cost  of  the  war,  and  the  su|>pression  of  tlie 
rebellion;  tirstly,  were  not  included  in  fact  in  the  treaty  of  Wasliini;to;i ; 
and  further,  and  secondly,  slioiild  not  be  adinilted  in  piinciple  as  urowinv;  out 
o!  the  acts  Committed  i)y  particular  ves>els  aliej;ed  to  have  been  enabled  to 
commit  de|)redations  on  the  shipping  of  a  l)eiligereiit  by  reason  oi  >ui-li  a  waul 
of  due  diligence  in  the  periornnuice  of  neutral  oblig.\l ions  as  that  wliieh  is 
imputed  by  th.-  United  States  to  (ireat  IJritain. 

"And,  whereas,  the  (iovinnient  of  her  iiritaiiic  Majesty  has  al>o  dtclarcd 
that  the  priiii'ii  le  iiivohi'd  in  the  M-cond  of  the  coulentions,  herein  before  set 
forth,  will  guiile  their  conduct  in  future.  And,  whereas,  th,;  Pre>ident  of  the 
United  States,  while  adlierini;  to  his  contention  that  the  said  claims  werf  in- 
cluded in  the  treaty,  adopts  for  the  future  Ihe  princi|>le  contained  in  the 
second  of  the  said  contentions,  so  far  as  to  declare  that  it  will  hereafter  guiile 
the  conduct  of  tlie  (Jovernment  of  the  United  States,  and  the  two  countries 
are  therefore  agreed  in  this  respect. 


If ;  i 


Wi 


■  i**9*^'''*«»(8S**' 


^.. 


"f  the  Unite.;  sue,''-'"'^''""-  «'  ".H-m..:  ..;/":>•  '"'^"Ver.  «„...,1.  ,"f; 

,•'•"•  ■« ' ,r ,,";:,  rr' "'  "*■!..  „„„  ,t  ;,;'■'  ■■■■'  <«  re„„„,;' ,:" 


frpafv,.f...i:  .         "•^''  '"W'ssihl,.  ,,.  „,...,       .  ''*'" 


»'••.  I>y  ai.,1  H nil 

n»  c'alii,  oi,  tlje 

'■'^^wi.l  before  U,e 

"•  as  to  be  j,ib. 
«^  aiiU'iKle.j  /t 

"«--lu.Jt.(l  i„  the 

'"■'"f'l'le,  iliat 
«re»iikoftJ,o 
'*'"'  hereHrter 
«'»'•'»  other. 

'   cimnges   of 
^'*  to  under. 

C'ongres.«,  it 

""   ""'   one 

'"".  of  May 
Kloii  of  tJie 
'H  ;-  Rrrive 
'Snlaily  to- 
'orrl  (iraii- 

^♦'   ilU'Iosc,} 

«"■  "tating 
'"«•',  thus 

■<'»««  Js  to 
'"""liiioii. 
"Hour  to 
•'  iitates, 
'?""<l  has 
(Jciverii- 
ilh.lraw 
'.'inle.ss\ 
'  <'ai(n3 
'••</  tJi« 

'  on  a 

t'  Hitlj 

uthor- 
I  new 

•le  as 


am"ii(l)Ml  by  tli)>  Spnntr,  iroiiM  or  woulil  not  excUitle  the  claims  for  national 
expt'ndlturps  in  piin^itit  nP  the  coiitetleratt^  cru.iiers. 

He  ailiN,  "  lli-r  MiO"!'ty'n  OoveriiniPiit  are  of  opinion  that  the  deflnilion,  a> 
therein  »>xpr»"<sf(l,  of  lli«  princlplt"  which  lioth  pivtrnnit'iits  art'  prcparpil  to 
atlopt  for  the  fuliire,  h  so  vague  that  it  ii  inipossihle  to  state  to  what  It  is  or  is 
not  anplicable,  and  they  lM>llere  that  It  would  only  lead  to  future  niisunder' 
standings." 

In  Ills  note  nfi'iith  Marrh  1S7J,  Lord  (iranvllle  thus  alludes  to  those  claims: 

"Nor  did  llt'r  Majt'sty's  (i  vt'rntniMit  olijfct  to  tin-  introdui'tion  of  claims 
for  the  pxpenst'of  the  pursuit  and  rapture  of  tin*  Al.thuna  and  other  vessels, 
notwithstanding  the  doulit  how  far  tho<>ecl.ilnis,  though  intMitiiuu-d  during  the 
conforetioesa"*  dircrt  claiuH,  canii'  within  the  proiwr  >vi<\»'  of  tlu'  arldtratlon." 

Thii*  is  <|uo|ed  l»y  (iciK-ral  Sohenck  in  his  note  to  Karl  Uranvillc,  May  '.'"^th, 
1S7l',  in  reply  to  the  refusal  of  the  latter  to  say  whether  tlu-y  woulil  bo  ex- 
cluded hy  the  supplemental  article  pro|H»ed  by  the  Senate, — lie  aild.s; — 

"The  (toveninieiit  of  the  I'nileil  Stiiic>  i»  nf  opiMion  thiil  tin  l.mi^uage  of 
the  Senate  cannot  lie  iiiierpreted  to  cxcluile  those  claims;  l>ut  I  atn  now  in- 
structed to  Miy  that  the  Article,  in  whatever  form  adopted,  as  to  the  pioceeil- 
ings  before  the  Arbitrators  Ht  (ieneva,  juust  be  unileritoiMl  to  prevent  only  the 
presentation  of  the  clniius  enumerated  in  the  second  contention  of  Iler  Mi\i- 
esty's  (Jovernineiit.''* 

The  great  piolileiu  how  to  get  the  indirect  claims  out  of  the  case  wliidi  Imth 
liarties  ardently  desiretl,  and  which  months  passed  in  ne;:otiiitioiis,  at  London 
and  Wiishingtitn,  bad  faileil  to  acconi|ilisli,  wan  tinally  solved  by  the  action  of 
the  Ariiltraiors.  Availini;  themselves  of  the  motion  of  the  English  ic^^eiit  for 
ai>  adjournnienl,  they  incidentally  pionoinio'd,  on  the  I'.ith  of  ,lune,  an 
opinion  on  the  uierils  ot  the  claims,  which,  the  parties  assumed,  left  no  excuse 
for  their  longer  embarrassing  the  operations  of  the  Tiil>inial. 

The  I'resident,  Count  "lopis,  premising  that  the  application  for  adjourn- 
meiit  was  before  the  Arbitrators  aiid  that  it  was  based  on  the  dilference 
between  the  two  tJovernments,  a.s  to  the  competency  of  the  tribunal  to  deal 
with  certain  claims  advanced  in  the  ciise  of  the  United  Slates,  which  he  enu- 
merated, proceeds:— -The  Arbitrators  dt>  not  pro|)ose  to  express  or  iini>iy  any 
opinion  tii><ui  the  point  thm  in  ditference  ijetween  the  i»vo  governments,  as 


•Diir  vli'ws.  Mil  til''  liii'Slx'iliriHV  4i|' e\|ilnii»ti>ry  tii'iilie.-"  ui«  k'umI'v  streii){lti,'?n><l  l>y 
wluil  Ik  salil  In  tin'  l."iiil..ii  SiilicitDm'  Joiinnil,  «(  Slav  II.  IST'J.  in  n  imllrf  «lil,  h  (.rweiles 
an  rxtriut  If  mi  «i\t  teller  of  .Aiirll  20,  ISTJ.  "  Piil.llc  .>|'l'ii'iii  st-.'iiis  now  ho  ilwhlfil 
In  Anii'rli-»  »«  <<ii  this  nlilc  ot  tliv  Atliinll'' tlial  the  "  ln<llre<'t  Cliilnis"  .•nj'ht'iiiit  to  linve 
feinivit  Hiiv  [lart  of  tin-  .Vno'iiiHii  ni>r,  iin>l  mm  ii|>  to  ilils  tlni«  tliat  |>,trt  of  tlieiMsf  lotal'v 
bliM'k*  th«-  pfottrfss  ol  Ihi'  artiitriilioii.  A  iHfiiMisil  was  iii.eh-  .ill  iIik  pari  ol  iln;  ijnn'rii- 
nient  >>r  'he  I'lilttsI  StHics  to  lin  ilie  iirhiiiiillon  o\t'r  the  olistH<  le  |>ri'srMte<l  liv  tlirse 
litulrss  hut  otistnii'ilvf  claims,  hv  an  arraiit;rn>>'iit  iliit  thrsf  t'laitiis  ulimilil  ii>>t  hti  for- 
mullv  n-ithilrnnn.  loil  that  tlm  arhllratl'ii  shoiiM  \v  iiriHvf'li'il  with  an  iho«i;li  thoy  were 
wltliilrawn,  an  RKreenii-nt  l»-lin  nimh'  at  llio  saim' time,  tietwcn  the  two  Pow.t"  that 
Urrai  Inilaiii  will  iicvt-r  iiiakr  xlnillitr  cIhIiiis  'Oi  aii>  Iiiluro  mrasloi).  when  Wtf  iiiay  havs 
li^uii  Ixlltgrrfiil  anil  ihi)  I'tillisl  .SiHtrs  iit'iiti.il  Siuli  nil  Hrraiigtiiiriit  as  this  Ik  ojK-n  to 
all  the  ilistiilVMiitaKfK  ot  an  "  uii'lcrslaiiiliinj"  w  hi.  Ii.  as  «very  lawyer  kn.iws,  is  lliu  tVuit- 
fiil  pHfenl  ol  iniaiin-lerstaiKliiitfs;  while  the  sli|><iUlloii  that  Ureal  Itrlliitii  ia  not  to  luak* 
jniUritcl  cUlnis  In   the   rmuro   Is  .itisunlly  siiitorerogatyry." 


/ 


■••swwl 


;■•%'»(»<•-*- 


"vsnpi 


I 


I 


8 

to  the  lntorpr,.ta.lo„  or  otWt  of  tl.«  ,r.,«.y.  H„t  it  .eem.  ,o  .h..„  obvlou. 
llittt  til..  »u(..t,M.ilal...l.Jocl  ..f  (I.e  .i.l|o„n.inont  must  b*.  t.,  glv  tl.n  two  Koyerr, 
...ent,    «n    op,K,rtu„lly    of  .let.M.nlnl„K    wheth.-r    tho    ..!,ilm.  m    re.ilon 

»h«ll    or    .hall    no,.    h«    .„h„,l„...|    ,.,    th, ,m,.„    of    ,l.e    Arb Ir.tor. 

an.l    ,ha,    any    .!  ,r..ro„cc  .K-tw......    the    two    Kover,.„,e„,a    o„    thiH    1"' 

n,„y  nmk..  ,1...  a.|,mirnn,e.,t  ....pro^Lu-tlve  „f  >ny  „„ft,|  ,.,r«rt.  a,„|  uft-,  . 

..ea.V..(  ...any  mo,„hH.,|„rl„8  which  l^.th  ,.«llo„,  „,hv  (k.  kept  Ir,  a  «ta,..  of 
pai,.f..l  M..,,K.,.«..  n.ay  .n.l  h.  a  .vs„|,,  wh  .-h.  It  1.  to  I..  pr..„„n..l.  ,H,th  ...y. 
..mine,,,,  woul.l  e,,„«lly  .leplore,  ,hal  of  „,akl..«  thi,  Arbltrailor,  who  ,, 
a..or,lv..    Thi,,  .H.in«  .o.  the  Ar..i,rat..r,  think  it  rl«h.  ,o  ^ta ,e  C  ^%T      'l 

upon  tf.e  priun,,l,'.,y  Menu,nonal  ,„„  appllrahU  fo  such  cas..,  .ood  Zn'. 

n„ion»    MouM.pon  .nch  princlplr.  ,.„•/..„ ,,  ,jrclu,l..l  fnnn  the  cZ 
sUcn,tion  of  n,c  Tri>.unnl   in  ,nakin.,  it.  a,r„r.l,  e.en  if  tUn.  ,«.r.  .o    // 
yrfM  M,reen  the  t,co  ,orenu,.n,t.-,  ,m  (c  the  competency  of  the  TrilJmt 
to    ileculf  thtrtoii.  '" 

On  .h..,a,no  .lay.  th„  .•m.n,..|  ..f  H.e  I'm.e.I  Sta,..,  infor.no.l  their  a^ent 
that  lulhel,opni..n.  ,he  announeenmnt  ina-ie  hy  the  Triln.na!  .n.ist  here- 
C...V.H  hy  ,he  nl,e.l  Sta.es  a.  .Ie,..nnina,ive  of  its  .|.,.|g„,o„  ,p.,  ,  « 
.,...sil.„.  of  publl.  law  involved.  ..,«.„  whi.h  ,h.,  Unitc.l  Stales  have  l,.M.  eU 
iil»on  taki.ig  th6  opinion  of  thi-  Tilhiinal.  ".Msted 

The  .leel.ratlon  of  the  Trihu.ml  was  s.ate.l  hy  the  A«ent...  after  r,.fere,K-o  to 
he.r  respect.ve  «overn,ne„ts,  ,o  be  sallsfactory  to  In,,!,  of  the.n.     Th.-Tl  ,n 
IHK  entry  was  acronllngly  n.a.le  In  the  protoc-ol  of  the  .'Tih  ..f  J„ne   I.7' 

M.-.  Hancro,,  Davi.  .aid  that  he  made  no  ohj,.etlon  ,0  ,he  ^^raniing  „f"u,e 
re,ue.t  .nad-  hy  I,..rd  "l Vn.enlen,  t,.  he  per.nio.-d  ...  wl.hdraw  l.i,a  1  ,  o  ! 
for  an  adjoun.n.en,,  and  to  ,ile  the  ar«,.„,ent  of  Her  Hritanic  Vai.4y'        ' 

ern„.en,.     Co„„t  .S.-lo,u...  o -half  ..f  all  the   A,  hi.raton.  then  d  .-lafe  I  ,hat" 

he.MUd  sev,>ra  clahns  fori re.,-t  losses,  mentioned  in  .heMa,e,.,e,uie  1 

the  A«en  ..f  the  Pnited  S.ate,  .,n  ,he  ..-,„.  l„„ant.  an.|  r..  er  ,  t  "t  ^J 
.Ha,e,nen  ,,ust  ma.le  by  the  Av-ent  of  Her  nri.anic  M.i.'stv.  are  IT  A 
l..ncH,.rth  w,  I  he.  wholly  excluded  f,.,„  the  con,ldera,|..n  Z.    Tl  e  T.  bn^d 

::':';^r:^;:;:  ""^^'"^^ '-  ^-""^  ^'"^  ^-'-- -  .vot..oo,":;:;;i; 

Thus  ended  this  dl|.lumalio  opisod...  The  American  journals,  which  favored 
the  Ad.„ln,stra,i,.n.d..e,ned  i,  a  «reat  lriu,..ph  that  we  had  ecZ UjuT 
».ent  aga.MMourseive.:  while  the  gucen.  in  her  pr,.n.«a,i,.,.  s^ee  ,Sr 
August.  n,o.c..s  to  infurn.  Parliament  ,ha,  the  c.-.wro^er.vjn  .-o^l  one. 
of  the  pr..sen.al.„n  of  the  A.nerican  ol.dms  for  indire.H  damages  1.1  i^n 
co.„p..sed  by  a  s,v,ntane.,us  decla.a.ion  of  the  Arhitrators.en  irel>  c  n  i  ten" 
w.th  the  views  announcd   by  her  a,  the  opening  ..f  the  session 

The  .  .(Terent  understandini;  o,  the  two  .governments  ,.n  a  ,na„er  so  essen 
tml  to  ,he  .    .Je,-,  of  ,he  .rea.y  as  ,.u.  extent  of  ,he  elal.ns  ,0  ..ri  ^  .^t  d  would 
seen,  n.exphcal.le,  were  i,  not  for  the  .act  tha,.  ,hon,h  um,.,  t  .T  ll  la 
...age.  .cane  any  conventional   arran.e.nent  has  l.e^n   u.l  ZZ^.  Z 


9 


[•■>  them  obvloui, 
•  tli«  two  KovfiT)' 
ilms  In  (|iipaiiun 
Ut«    Afbliralort; 

>  <'■>  thiH  (Miiiit 
J«t't,  Mini  Hrter  a 
•■pt  In  a  Htato  of 
'iMne.l,  iMith  xov. 
I>itrai|,)n  wholly 
«  thaf,  a/ler  the 
'  lite  ijorcrnmrnt 
rrirnl,  indhiilH- 

>  »ol  rouHUtuli; 
iiMfn,  i/oud  foun- 

•I  ff»m  the  con- 
)f  were  tin  ills- 
of  the  Tril.iinal 

M'll  llu'ir  iiKOTit 
ml  must  be  re- 
iienl  up<  the 
9  have  hiKhted 

ter  reference  to 
••    The  follow- 
JiiiK',  Is":;. 
triintinK  of  the 

hitH|)|llic;,t|,,Il 

V'it.i<'»ly'«  «;.>v- 
1  ih'cliirpil  that 
"•••III  made  by 
■rc4  to  In  »Le 
ore,  and  from 
tlie  Tribiiiiuj; 
otocol  of  this 

uliieh  favored 
ciiri'd  ajudg. 
|>^'ecli,  lotli  of 
c'(>n.sor|(i(>nc« 
«es,  ha*  been 

fly  consistent 

II. 

ler  so  essen- 

Ijtisfed  would 

Ik'  same  lan- 

bftweon  tilt' 


United  8lat<-ii  and  Kni^laiid.  In  the  Interpretation  of  which  th«  iiartiea  a(r«ed. 
Ill  the  preM-nt  ca  •  somethint;  may  be  Imputed  to  the  fact,  which  we  learn 
fpxn  the  rirll.i  tary  I>ei>aleii,  that  uo  part  of  the  treaty,  except  the  "three 
riileii,"  had  been  submitted,  as  is  iiaiwl  iu  ^uch  caaes,  to  the  law  offlcen  of  the 
Crown. 

Though  the  Indirect  claim*  were  not  iUUxi  in  lo  many  word*  k>  b«  with- 
drawn, they  were  merged,  a«  we  Ijave  elsewhere  had  occaaion  to  remark, 
"  in  the  amicable  settlement"  effected  by  the  treaty.  Tliat  such  liaa  been 
the  declaration  of  tlie  Uritish  ComuiinHioners  Is  admitted,  as  to  four 
of  them  in  the  .Vmerican  aruument  — by  the  Manjiiiit  of  KIpon  and  Sit 
Stalford  .Vortlicote  lit  their  places  in  I'ttrliament,  and  l)y  Sir  K.  Thornton 
and  Mr.  liernard  on  public  occasions  sought  by  tlieniselves.  .Sir  John  A.  Mac- 
donald  conlines  himself,  in  his  speeeh  of  ltd  of  .May  |s7a,  lieforo  the  Uomi-- 
Ion  Parliament,  to  the  article!i  reKardine  (  anada.  but  we  know  from  that 
Minister  himself,  in  |M>rsoiial  intercourM*,  that  he,  in  no  wine,  dilfers  from  his 
coileiiijucs  ivs  to  the  AUbama  Claims.  Nor  do  wu  understand  that  any  thing, 
ill  a  contrary  sense,  was  expressed  at  any  meeting  of  the  I'lenlpotcntiaries  Ijy 
our  Secretary  of  Stale,  a.s  the  orijaii  of  the  American  Commissioners:  while 
our  Envoy  In  KiiKland,  himself  a  Cominissloner,  listened  to  the  siatetnents 
ot  Mln'stcrs  In  both  houses  of  rarliamenl,  in  which  the  fact  of  tlie  aban- 
donment ot  till'  indited  claiiii!)  wa.s  assumed,  without,  in  liis  suli3e<|Ueiil 
iiiter\iews  Willi  Lord  (iraiiviile,  K>vii>»(  any  intimation  ot  llie  mistake 
uf  the  Uiitlsli  government,  if  any  existed.  Our  present  .\tl<  riiey  Ueii- 
eral,  who  was  likewise  a  I'leni(>otenliary,  and  who,  in  siicli  cases  as  the 
coiistiuctioii  of  u  treaty  would,  under  ordinary  circumstances,  be  ap|»;aled  to 
as  the  law  oflicerof  tlie  governiiu-nt,  lias  given  no  opinion.  Nor  have  the 
vtewbof  the  "  Aniei'icaii  case"  received  any  sanction  from  ine  venerable  Jus- 
tice Nelson,  or,  as  far  as  the  ptiblic^are  apprised,  fioiii  the  leinainiiig  uieiulj«T 
of  the  Ciimiiiissioii,  oil  the  part  of  the  I'lilied  States,  the  iale  Attoniey  (ien- 
eral  lloar. 

We  have,  as  we  were  preparing  this  introduction,  received  the  Uritish  and 
.\merican  arguments,  laid  bel'me  the  lo-neva  'i'riliunal  in  June  last.  The 
chapter  In  the  Atnerieaii  ari^iinietit  relative  to  Indiieet  claims,  as  separately 
pulilisheil,  bail  previously  readied  us. 

The  action  of  the  Tribunal,  in  removing  these  claims  wholly  from  its  coii- 
slderatior.  conlines  the  last  papnr  to  an  exclusively  historical  interest.  It 
Is  <lrenii(.usly  urged,  despite  of  the  discussions  that  liati  l)een  going  on  for 
upwards  of  lour  inonilis  ami  the  concessions  made  liy  Mr.  Vish,  that  the 
fact  that  the  indirect  claims  were  not  waived  by  ilie  American  commission- 
ers, ought  to  have  biren  known  to  their  Uritish  colleagum,  or  rather 
that  no  reasim  existed  for  the  interpretation  given  by  them  to  the 
treaty  in  that  respeut.  U  is  maintained  that  there  is  r.o  distinction  be- 
tween the  direct  and  I'idirect  claluis  and  that  the  latter  are  "  by  the  exjiress 
terms,  the  spirit  as  wi'll  iis  the  language  of  the  treaty  referred  to  the  Tribu- 
nal." The  argument  drawsa  distiiidoii  between  the  claims  previously  asserted 
l>y  our  government,  founded  on  the  preinaline  recognition  of  lielllgerency, 
and  which  it  admits  were  abandoiietl  by  I'lesident  Grant,  and  those  which,  it 
is  maintained,  resulted  from  the  escajie  of  the  Confederate  cruisers. 


II 


,<#:■ 


fm^L 


0 


I 


a 


10 

It  is  .leni  d  that  to  pay  tli«  prho  of  c.-rUin  ships  .loslroyo,]  is  ,l„o  ronara 
^«n     C«nH.i.ral,o,..  of  international  obligations  forl.i.I  the  rou     el  Ttho 
I'tHtcl  Maten  to  press  for  extren.e  d.nuiges.  on  account  of  the      t  '        in 
.h.n.«  su. R.red  b>  the  nation  itselt.  ...onsh  the  neg,|«enoe  of     r        Hr   •  i  " 
buttheydes.rothejudifinentorthe  Trilmna!  on  this  „„.i.„i  "''»•"». 

their  own  guidance  in  their  m.ure  Mations^i;;  Z^^:::^:  """"""  '" 
All  the  counsel  not  only  indon  .,  but  reiterate  the  statemen;,  so  o.lensive  to 
England,  assumed  to  have  been  written  by  Mr.  Hancroft  Divis  in  l,"^  '" 
case,  thereby  absolving  that  gen.len.an  frL  exchlZ  Its    ;^,  ^^'  ^'^ 
No   only  are  the  tnotives  of  «;reat   r.ntain.  as  evinced  in  the   ,>  ecle    o    i^" 
dividual   Jl.nisters  and  the  acts  of  ibe  governnirnt   ,  iurU,  ii. 
recognition   of  Con.Wlerate     belligerency   th:;;;;'-^:^  !1 1' r;;:!':; 
claims,)  reterre<l  to  as  explaining  her  course  wi,h  rcsnect   i.-  L   a,  T 
and  the  other  rebel  cruisers.  b,.t  the  counsel  J,  LI  ""Alabama 

to  the  coloni.a,ion   of  these  States    t;.rw';"^'    nlAt!;"":;"'"'" 
<..•  I>-ke  and  MawUns.  why  up  to  ,8.0  Engl.;,  had  no':";;;!;';:::"''^" 
The  subject  of  indirect  claims  is  not  toiicberl  ,>n  i.,  n. ,  n  •  •  > 

..I*  l,.sollK.r  „■,  ,  the  ,w„„  f„r  ,..,„,  i„„|,,„,  ,„  ,„,,,  .. 

1-.  tl„  i„,m,.i,.„,y  „f  „„  ,,,,„, ,    ,  ,,     .  ',,;"■  " ''  "■  I"  •''■■"•>  »'" 

CI  "lie  4  .,iiw.ir.u..  criisieis  t,  t,e  atlril.»t.-.l.  ^ 

•nent.  and   which  a.lerwards  w   I  .f  ,/;;;' '^^^ 

service,  a..tually  armed  for  w.r."  hi       I'd  L  '"  '"'""'''" 

«1io  c^,.,«  •  ,.  '" '"s"  'o  a'-coril.uice,  as  w<  couee  ve  with 

•.«..,  ii«  1.11.1,..^.  „,„,  „„  ,-,,i,i,„„„„j,^  „  ,„  ,,,,1^.,, ,, _^  ^^_^^^^^_^^ 


11 


tl  is  due  ro|)«ra- 
e  couiisol  of  llio 
tli«  nationiil  in- 
>f  (Jreiit  IJiitain, 
iilar  quest  ion  for 

Aill. 

ts  .«(>  (tflensive  to 
s,  in  tln>  original 
sibility  for  t.lieiii. 
I  jipceclies  of  iri- 
ig  flifi  premature 
'<!  as  a  bitsis  of 
It;  llie  Alabama 

pi'rioil  anterior 
tical  enterprises 
trulity  law. 
itisli  argnment, 
en  ox|)OM(leil  in 

are  not  ailniii- 
ser.'" 

I'liection  witli  a 
>  be  shown  tliat 

i.ilber  tlian  to 
rolouged  career 

e  part  of  Eng- 
sisted  on,  a^  a 
were  not  the. 
>t  N)  l)e  within 
ncurreJ  in  the 
[I'lieric  tt^Mi  of 
ill  clalrnt  (niut      i 

Alabama,  the 
lits  that  tliese 
ve  their  armj- 

in  any  otiier 
couotMve,  witli 
ilirect  ciaiius, 
iinitt<.«il  by  all 
licaled  t )  the 
'  the  volumes 
I  ihe  counter- 
c,  belitie  the 
;unient"  how- 
unnnjj!  within 
,  the  Itetribu- 
i>w  attempted 


to  prove  that  Great  Britain  failed  to  fulfil  her  duties  to  the  United  Stales. 
The  claim  from  these  vessels  is  mainly  put  on  facilities  alleged  to  have  been 
afforded  them  iii  British  colonial  iwjrts. 

The  high  character  of  Mr.  Adams  and  his  eminent  (|ualifications  have 
hitherto  prevented  any  allusion  to  the  anomalous  jKisition,  which  he  occupies 
as  an  Arbitrator  or  Judge,  after  having  advocated  before  the  British  govern- 
ment, as  our  resident  Miiiisl;-r  in  Kngland,  those  claims  on  the  validity  of 
which  he  is  now  called  to  prontmnce.  Nothing  is  better  iniderstood  than  that 
a  lawyer,  when  raised  to  the  bench,  shall  not  decide  the  case.n  which  ho  argued 
•OS  counsel  at  the  bar.  The  assertion  that  the  indirect  claims  had  bt?en 
persistently  urged  on  England,  previously  to  the  treaty,  rests  mainly  on  tJie 
despatches  of  Mr.  Adams:  while  he  unite*  with  the  other  Arbitrators  in  de- 
claring that  '•  after  the  perusal  of  all  that  has  been  urged  on  the  part  of  the 
government  of  the  I'nited  .'states,  li\  re.s|iect  to  these  claims,  they  have  ar- 
rived individually  and  collectively,  at  the  conclusion  that  thwse  claims  do  not 
constitute  upon  the  principles  of  internatiimal  law  .ipplicable  to  such  cases, 
go(Kl  foundal  on  for  an  award  of  co3ni>ensation  or  comput.^tion  of  damages 
between  nations." 

If  arbitration  is  hereafter  recognizetl  as  an  international  institution,  it  is 
essential  for  the  success  of  a  system,  which  it  is  proi)osed  to  substitute  for  an 
appeal  to  arms  as  a  pacific  solution  of  all  controversies,  that  the  constitution 
of  those  tribunals  should  be  distinctly  understood,  and  that  it  should  be 
known  whether  the  arbitrators  named  by  the  parties  themselves  should  be  the 
adviK-ates  of  their  n'spective  countries,  or  whether  they  should,  equally  with 
those  apjKjinted  by  foreign  powers,  decide  impartially  as  judges. 

We  have  no  otlicial  publication  of  the  Tribunal  sinct  the  withdrawal  of  the 
indirect  claims,  aun  if  it  be  correct,  ;is  the  public  journals  of  to-day  announce, 
that  thequestions  of  law  there  mejitioned  are  still  under  adjudication,  it  is 
evident,  in  as  much  as  they  reach  the  very  foundation  of  the  controversy, 
that  no  decision  as  to  the  merits  of  the  cases,  confessedly  within  tueir  juris- 
4iiction.  has  as  yet  been  arrived  at  by  the  arbitrators. 

W.  B.  Lawukncb. 

Ochre  Point,  ffewport,  tihoilt-.  lalami,  \-Ht  of  August,  l«72. 


5S5^WP?" 


S^ii#.m.*J^S,«-., 


mmmamm 


il;i 


! 


\ 


X. 


i 


0/^.*-' 


TRKATYiOF  WASHINGTON. 


m 


\ 


Ochre  Point,  Newpout,  R.  I., ) 
MayJl,  1871.      ) 

To  the  Editor  of  the  World: 

Sia:  I  h.'ul  intendtvl  to  {»re|>aie  a  memoir,  tracing  to  tlioir  ori- 
gin tJio  several  points  of  <lisiiiito  involvoil  in  the  new  treaty.  For 
this  I  have  extensive  materials,  not  merely  in  printeil  <loouments, 
but  in  the  notes  whieh  I  have  mmle  diirini;  nianv  vears  i)ast,  "oin" 
b:ick,  in  reference  to  some  of  tlie  suhjects,  to  my  connection  with 
tlie  Kn-ilish  mission.  Interrujdions  which  I  couM  not  prevent 
have  so  tar  retar^k'il  my  work  that  I  tear  that  I  shall  not  be  able 
to  complete  the  paper,  in  a  manner  sjuisfactory  to  myself,  before 
the  interest  in  it  will  be,  in  a  great  measure,  lost  by  the  final 
action  of  the  Senate.  I,  therefore,  take  the  liberty  of  semling  you 
this  imperfect  menioranilum. 

The  able  articles  which  have,  from  time  to  time,  appeared  in  the 
World  on  the  topics  now  involved,  an<l  with  which,  as  well  as 
with  your  remarks  on  the  merits  of  the  work  of  the  lliyh  Com- 
mission,  I  fully  concur,  supersede  the  necessity  for  your  readers  of 
further  elaborate  elucidations.  I  cannot,  however,  withhold  the 
expression  of  my  gratification  that,  regardless  of  its  bearing  on 
nu:e  partisan  politics,  you  have  taken  a  statesmanlike  view  of  the 


/ 


i\ 


^»^-Sp^Bt:;^;-w««». 


"^y^f^mmmmm:^. 


V 


i 


^' 


14 

sutyect,  appropriate  to  a  journal  of  conLrollini?  intlucnce,  ami 
wliifh,  as  to  what  concerns  our  international  relations,  ought  to 
have  no  oth.T  guide  than  the  honor  an.l  interest  of  our  country. 

The  merit,  in  my  eyes,  of  the  treaty  aiiscs  as  much  from  what 
is  not  in  it  as  from  its  positive  stipulations.  The  reproduction  in 
the  paper  ascribed  to  Lord  Tenterden,  and  which  contains  an  an- 
thoritative  exposition  of  the  British  case  so  far  as  regards  the 
Alabama  claims,  of  my  remarks  made  at  the  Social  Science  Con- 
gress  at  Bristol  in  1809,  may  jt.stify  a  reference,  without  incurrinrr 
the  charge  of  prcsumj.tion,  to  the  accordance  of  the  views  then 
^  expressed  wit);  the  terms  of  the  present  arrangement.  I  am  well 
satisficil  to  fitid  tliat  no  sanction  is  anywhere  given  to  the  com- 
plaints  .against  the  issue  of  the  British  proclamation  of  neutralitv, 
jnit  forward  by  Mr.  Sewar.l,  apparently  in  ignoiancc  of  the  diV- 
tmction  between  the  recognition 'of  belligerent  rights  and  the 
acknowledgment  of  the  i.  dependence  of  a  Statv.* 

It  has  ever  seemed  to  me  that  as  the  law  of  nations  cannot  bo 
enforced  by  any  penal  legislation,  like  th.'  internal  law  of  a  State 
and  must  depend  for  its  observance  on  the  moral  sense  of  the 
civilized  world,  to  attempt  lo  apply  to  it  considerations  of  tern- 
porary  expediency  is  to  take  from  it  its  only  sanction.  \ 

Important  as  the  law  of  nations  is  as  a  rule  in  the  intercourse 
of  mdei .ndent  sovereignties,  the  njcessity  of  its  recognition  in 
civil  wai-s— that  is  to  say  in  the  contests  between  meinlK-rs  of  the 
same  society,  which,  j.assing  beyond  the  intervension  of  the  ma.r- 
istrate  or  suppression  by  the  police,  have  assumed  a  belligtT- 
ent  character  in  the  opposing  array  of  regularly  consiitu'ted 
armies— IS  even  more  imperative  than  in  international  hostilities. 
Who  can  tell  to  what  extent  tin?  horrors  of  war  woui.l  be  au-'men- 
ted  (though  we  may  have  some  indications  of  it  in  the  content 
between  the  Commune  an.l  the  Versailles  Assembly)  if  the  rubs 
of  belligerency  were  not   applied  in  those  cases  in  which,  as  it  is 


eracv  ,v  r«        vl     T        '      """"  '  ""  "-"-»'■'«"■""•' <«*!  .he  Southern  ConW- 

»n,-e„f  he  great  o.m  c.Ier*,,,,,.  oru.he.l,  bu,  thev  t.Mk  g,..M  c-ara  t,.  hv,.1.1  ,he  ,  JmaVure 
N,  r";::;: iw'         "  "  """'•'^'"'"■'"  •"  •  >-""-'  >-')•  '^••""■ive.r  ^,arJa  ,ro™  Z 

Somhirn'sl!!'.'  1"""'' ,'":;, '^"^""««"  '"'"^«  al*.l..,.ly  .okno«le.|g«.,.  .t  M.  «irW  ,Uv,  th« 
8mthernS.a..^H,«Mil«ere,.t  party.  Were  they  .vrouj  iu  ,i«h.»  ^.■.--man,„HiU- 
Op,n,on  imparihUe  sur  la  qutttiun  ,U  f  Atabanm. 


\m^* 


infliifiice,  and 
tioiis,  ought  to 
our  comitiy, 
iich  from  what 
I'production  in 
oiitaiiis  an  au- 
IS  rcganls  tlie 

Science  C'on- 
liout  inourrinrr 
a  views  then 
t.  I  am  well 
?n  to  ilu'  f()m- 

of  neutrality, 
ce  of  the  tlis- 
ylits   and   the 

ons  cannot  ho 
iw  of  a  State, 
I  sense  of  the 
tions   of  ttni- 

\ 
e  iiitercourso 
ec()giiiti(jn  in 
.'inherH  of  the 
1  of  the  ma<'- 
d  a  heliiger- 
■  constituted 
a!  hostiliiifs. 
1  be  augmen- 
the  conli'St 
it  tlie  ruit's 
I'liich,  as  it  is 


lout  horn  CoiiM- 
to  tve  Mm  Uiiinii 
iwliiU  preiHimler 
i'l  the  |iremnlure 
Iiiimieil  Iruiii  tlie 

m  early  tUy,  tii« 
'••—UtitHlitHili— 


well  said  hy  Vattol,  "civil  wars,  breaking  the  bonds  of  society 
and  of  the  government,  give  rise  in  a  nation  to  two  independent 
parties  who  acknowledge  no  common  judge." 

In  our  late  civil  war,  so  fir  as  the  parties  directly  involved  in  it 
were  concerned,  the  apprehension  of  retaliation,  always  appealed 
to  when  the  two  sidKs  approxiniute  to  one  another  in  strength, 
prevented  the  ap[)lication  of  measures  which  were  threatened  in 
the  first  proclanntion  of  the  I'resident.  Tiiough  some  privateers- 
men  were  subjected  to  a  trial  for  piracy,  a  cartel  was  signed  in 
July,  186-2,  by  a  general  ofticer  of  the  United  States,  and  a  general 
officer  of  the  Confederates,  described  as  "  having  been  commis- 
sioned by  the  authorities  they  respectively  represented,"  for  a 
general  exchange  ot  prisoners,  and  in  this  were  included  prisoners 
taken  on  board  of  private  armed  vessels. 

Though  all  other  countries,  with  the  exception,  ])orhaps,  of  China 
and  Turkey,  eipially  with  Great  Ibitain,  recogni/ed  the  belligerent 
rights  of  the  confederates,  and  though  any  other  course  would 
have  justly  exposeil  her  to  the  reproach  of  having  violated  all  the 
safe  precedents  of  international  law,  the  instructions,  which  Mr. 
Adams  constantly  evaded,  to  deiiuunl  the  revocation  of  the  proc- 
lamation were  incessant,  and  all  the  injuries  resulting  from  the 
maritime  operations  ot  the  confederates  were  attrilmted  to  the 
recognition  of  l)clligerent  rights — in  other  words,  to  England 
liaving  reluscd,  what  the  United  States  tlu'inselves  did  not  dare  to 
do,  to  treat  the  confederates  as  out  of  the  protection  of  the  law  of 
nations.  A«<  Mr.  Canning,  in  the  analogous  case  of  the  Greek  rev- 
olution, explained,  tliere  is  iio  alternative,  if  the  belligerency  of 
the  revolutionary  party  was  not  acknowledged,  but  to  reg.ard  them 
as  pirates  and  lioM  the  ancient  government  responsible  for  all  in- 
juries inflicted  by  them. 

It  was  in  vain  that  (Jreat  lintain  showdl  that  the  United  States 
liail  given  to  the  world  the  strongest  eviilence  of  the  existence  of 
actual  war  by  the  establishment,  .imong  other  acts,  of  ;i  block- 
ade which  Could  only  exist  as  .in  inciileiit  of  w  ir ;  wliiie,  unless 
there  was  belligerency,  there  was  no  excuse  for  the  search  of 
neutral  vessels,  much  less  for  their  condeiniiati(>n  for  viol.iting  a 
blockade  or  carrying  contral)and.  The  blo.'Uade  w.is  only  one  of 
the  conseipiences  of  the  existence  of  war;  and  whether  it  was 
officially  announceil  or  not  to  the  IJritish  government,  l»efore  the 
issue  of  the  tiueen's  proclamation,  as  I  have  elswhere  had  fretpient 


-* 


il 


"*'^***siwr"! 


:^??rr"wi«»  iiiu.i..uw>>*,»^: 


16 

occjision  to  rem;\ik,  was  wholly  imiivUorial,  piovilo.l  .i  civil  war 
then  e.\i.ste<l.  That  the  proclamation  had  no  mirrifiKlly  character 
may  be  reasonably  inferre.l  from  the  fact,  that  it  was  advocated 
by  the  best  friends  of  the  northern  cause,  inclii.ling  Mr.  P\jrster, 
an.l  was  considered  by  Mr.  Seward's  minister,  Mr.  Adams,  to  be, 
in  some  respects,  advantageous  to  the  United  Slates.  "At  any 
rate,"  ho  said  in  a  dispatch  to  tne  Secretary  of  State,  "the  act  ha<J 
released  the  government  of  the  Unite.]  St.ites  from  responsibility 
for  any  misdeeds  of  the  rebels  tow.trds  Gre.it  Britain.  If  any  of 
their  people  should  capture  or  maltreat  a  Hritish  vessel  on'the 
ocean,  the  reclamation  must  be  made  oidy  upon  those  who  h:id 
authorized  the  wrong.     The  United  States  would  not  be  liable." 

That,  as  a  precautionary  measure  for  the  interests  of  British 
commerce,  it  was  not  premature,  was  .iu<lici:illy  est.ablisheil  in  the 
"prize  cases"  decided  by  the  Su|)reme  Court  ..f  the  United 
States.  A  capture  was  made  as  early  as  the  I'Jth  of  May,  of  a 
IJritish  vessel,  for  running  the  blockade  of  Charleston,  the  Presi- 
dent's message  declaring  the  blockade,  which  w.is  issued  the  I'Jth 
of  April,  having  gone  into  operation  the  30th  of  the  same  inontli. 
The  British  proclamation  l)e:ns  d.ile  the  13th  of  Mav. 

Vessels  and  cargoes  of  the  aggregate  value  of'miMiMns  were 
captured  on  the  ground  of  the  violation  of  the  neutr.il  obligations 
of  Eiigl.ind,  .an.l  the  rule  of  coutinuous  voyages  was  applied,  in  a 
more  stringent  sense  than  ever  ha.I  beeir  attempted  by  Lor.l  • 
Stowell,  to  cases  of  blocka.le  an.l  contraband,  before  any  knowl- 
edge  coul.l  possibly  have  been  receive.l,  on  this  side  ol'  the  At- 
lanti'S  of  the  existence  of  the  Queen's  proclamation. 

Ifthere  w.as  n.i  belligeren.-y,  nothing  can  be  clearer  than  that 
those  captures  were  all  nnauthorize.l.  Conse.piently,  the  pr.u-ecds 
of  the  prizes  woul.l  constitute  a  legitimate  claim  against  the 
United  States. 

Nor  is  it  a  slight  evi.lence  of  the  fillacy  of  Mr.  Seward's  posi- 
tion  as  to  onfe.ier.ito  recognition,  that  it  "has  re.-eive  I  no  sai>ct:on 
from  the  m)st  eminent  of  our  own  publicists  President  Woolsey 
having  rejecte.l  it  as  altogether  untenable.  It  was  state.l  bv  the 
publisher.  Little,  in  his  te-tinDny  in  the  case  of  Lawrence  t-v. 
Dana,  that  Mr.  Seward  had  refuse-l  to  take  copies  of  the  secon.i 
edition  of  Lawrence's  Wheatin,  as  Mr.  M.ircy  ha<l  uf  the  first, 
tor  our  ministers  and  consuls  abroa.l,  on  account  of  the  author's 
rej.u.lialioii,  bran.ie.l  as  disl,)yal,  of  the  Secretary's  doctrine-,  and 


s:"  ■ 


.i*^#-' 


17 


that  I\Ii .  Dana  was  em|»l()yfi"l  to  make  a  loyal  book ;  yet  Lord 
'IV'iit.'rdi-n,  ill  the  pijier  rotorri'<l  to,  says  that  "  the  stro ripest  ar- 
giimontH  ill  t'aviH-  of  tho  ri>ci)>;nitioii  of  eoiifeiioiate  belligerency 
are  to  be  fuiin.i  in  the  notes  of  Mr.  DaiiuV  eigiith  edition  of 
Wheaton.'" 

A  still  more  important  ciroiimstance,  in  this  connection,  is  the 
view  imiformly  taken  of  the  matter  by  oiir  minister  in  London. 
J  have  already  referred  to  Mr.  Adams's  despatch,  showing  that 
the  recognition  of  rel>el  belligerency  was  not  without  its  advanta- 
ges for  us.  Li  .mother  of  15th  of  April,  IStJT,  he  fully  relieves 
himself  from  all  responsibility  for  the  policy  enjoined  on  him. 
Having  been  asked  his  opinion  by  Mr.  .Seward,  "in  regard  to 
what  appears  to  be  the  only  obstacle  to  arbitration  left,"  he  tells 
him  lliat  it  the  i|ue>tion  of  recognizing  belligerency  co  dd  be  sus- 
ceptible of  being  submitted  to  umpirage  the  doing  so  would  not 
be  advisable  for  us. 

•'The  concession  ot  a  possibility  that  the  exercise  of  that  sover- 
eign right  of  a  .State  could  be  drawn  into  ipiestion  might  have  the 
erteet  of  tying  our  own  hands  in  future  cases."  lie  adds:  "  As  it 
is,  the  very  agitation  of  that  <piestion  in  America,  to  which  yoii 
.illuile  as  coiiiifctcd  with  tlic  inchoate  Lisli  movement,  has  the 
etli'ct  of  undermining  the  foundation  of  our  claim  to  complain  in 
the  present  instance.  It  must  bi-  obv  ious  to  you  that  the  atloption 
of  the  propositions  pre.s.sed  in  Congress  must  have  the  necessary 
effect  of  weakciiiii'j;  our  chances  of  getting  any  valuible  result  at 
all  from  arbitration;  for  if  we  follow  the  suit  of  Kiigland  when 
the  respective  positions  come  to  be  reversed,  I  do  not  perceive 
how  we  do  not,  ixiri  puHxii,  come  to  justify  her  comluct." 

It  is  not  my  intention  to  be  the  apologist  of  Great  Britain,  but, 
in  view  <)f  the  pendency  of  the  treaty  bttoie  the  Senate,  and  of 
its  impartial  disciissi<Mi,  it  m  ly  not  be  improper  to  suggest  that, 
bad  England  wished  to  avail  herself  to  our  detriment  of  the  inter- 
nal ditliculties  jti  which  we  were  involved,  she  had  many  means  of 
doing  so  without  exposing  herself  to  any  claims  for  vindictive 
damages.  Xo  rule  of  iuiernalion  il  law  prevents  a  country  t'rom 
opening  its  ports  to  privateers  or  to  the  prizes  made  by  them  or 
by  public  cruisers,  pros  ided  it  does  it  equally  as  to  both  parties, 
and  though  a  prize  court  canu.)t  sil  in  a  neutral  country,  prizes 
taken  into  a  neutral  port  may  be  condeinm.d  in  the  courts  of  the 
belligerent. 


r!ii' 

11 


% 


"utami. 


"^""Vmrntr.* 


-mir 


18 


II 


i    I 


1  , 


iiij 


Now,  in  reference  to  either  Uio  Unite.]  States  or  th  e  con  federates 
ns  is  shown  in  the  abortive  attempt  of  Mr.  Sewanl  to  involve  Kng- 
land  anil  France  in  our  contest  l»y  a  convention  with  the  United 
States  ad<.|.tin<;  the  ruleoftlie  "declaration  of  Paris,"  !)nt  which 
neither  would  sitrn  without  stating  that  it  had  no  a|.|»licatioii  to  the 
exi«tini;war,it  is  apparent  that  Kngland  would  not  have  considered 
the  admission  of  privateers  or  their  prizes  into  her  ports  as  ropag- 
nant  to  her  obligations  as  a  party  to  tint  "declaration." 

Nor  were  the  United  States  invulnerable  as  to  the  efficacy  of 
the  blockade,  especially  when  tirst  established.  When  the  "decla- 
ration of  Paris"  w.as  made,  it  was  announcel  in  the  Kngiish  Parli- 
ament that,  if  t!ie  rule  of  blockade  as  there  lai<l  down  was  carried 
out,  the  whole  British  navy,  in  the  event  of  a  war,  would  not  be, 
ade(piate  to  the  blockade  of  the  French  ports. 

It  would  seem,  even  according  to  the  official  article  inserted  in 
the  Mmiteui;  af\cr  the  visit  of  Iloebuck  and  Lin.ls.iy  to  Coni- 
piegnc,  that,  had  Kngland  consented,  France  was  <piite  readv  to 
acknowledge  the  inde|)en(Ience  of  the  confederates  and  to  set  at 
naught  the  blockade,  whieh  was  sustained  by  vessels  suddenly 
converted  from  mcrcliantnuMi  into  ships  of  war,  and  in  no  condi- 
tion to  resist  the  combined  navies  of  Kiiglan-l  and  France.  What 
the  views  of  the  Kmperor  were  as  to  the  southern  confederacy 
aj.pears  in  his  letters  to  the  officers  sent  out  to  Mexico,  which  were 
published  at  the  time  and  never  disavowed.  In  one  of  them  he 
says:  "We  have  an  interest  in  this,  that  the  republic  of.  the 
United  States  be  powerful  and  prospermis  ;  but  we  have  none  in 
this,  that  she  shonl.l  seize  possession  of  all  (he  Mexic.iii  (iulf,  do- 
minate fiorn  thence  the  Antilles  as  well  .as  South  America,  and  be 
the  sole  dispenser  of  the  pro<lucts  of  the  New  World." 

While  I  could  never  see  .any  force  in  the  alleged  offence  imputed 
to  the  Queen's  proclamation,  and  have  so  declare<l,  I  have  always 
maintained  that  Kngland  was  liable  for  the  depredations  "of 
confederate  cruisers,  which  had  been  built  for  them  or  tilted  out 
in  Kngiish  port-  with  the  intention  of  being  employed  against  the 
United  .States  ;  an<l  most  csp..cially  was  she  so  liab'c  for  the  acts  <.f 
such  cruisers,  wherever  built  or  cjnippe  1,  as  had  made  eitiier  Kng- 
land or  her  colonies  the  base  of  hostile  expeditions.  And  in  con- 
sidering this  matter  it  is  wholly  immaterial  what  construction  w.is 
given  by  her  courts  to  her  neutrality  acts.  Neither  the  obligation 
of  Great  IJritain  nor  our  rights  are  to  be  tested  by  the      Ijiidica- 


i  i 


«»»ita* 


10 


tions  of  liiT  tribunals,  especially  of  her  common  law  courts,  but 
only  by  the  law  of  nations.  This,  indoed,  is  recognized  in  the 
regret  expressed  by  IK-r  IJritanio  Majesty  for  the  escape,  under 
wiiah'ver  ciroiunstances,  of  the  Alabama  and  other  vessels  from 
Itritish  ports,  and  for  the  depredations  committed  Ijy  those  vessels, 
and  thin  avowal  is  made,  notwithstanding  the  decision  in  the 
Alexandra. 

There  is  certainly  no  little  dillieulty  in  always  determining  what 
acts  atfecting  belligerents  a  neutral  State  can  lawfully  do.  The 
rub'  formerly  was  that  both  the  State  and  its  citizens  \iiight  do 
what  they  jileased  in  aiding  either  party,  provided  they  treated 
them  both  alike ;  and  casos  have  occurred  where  a  nation  has 
been  permitted  to  furnish  to  a  In-lligerent  military  aid  when  that 
aid  had  been  stipulated  in  a  treaty  antecedent  to  the  war.  A  pro- 
vision in  the  treaty  of  177m,  with  Franc(>,  allowed  her  to  carry  her 
prizes  into  our  ports,  while  those  of  lii-r  enemy  were  forbidden  to 
enter  except  f<»r  stress  of  weather;  and  the  ditficulties  which  it 
occasioned  are  familiar  to  all  conversant  with  our  early  diplomatic 
history. 

It  does  not  seem  very  easy  to  explain  why  a  sale  of  munitions 
of  war  ill  !i  neutral  country,  by  individuals,  to  a  belligerent  should 
be  free  from  .•my  violation  of  neutr.il  duties,  while  the  sale  of  a  ship 
should  not  i)e  so.  IiKh-ed,  it  has  been  held  by  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States  thai  an  armed  sliip  may  be  sent  abroad  to 
seek  a  market  like  any  other  commo  lity,  and,  when  abroad,  sold 
to  ii  bolligereiit.  The  simplest  rule  for  obviating  all  dilJieuIties 
between  neutrals  and  belligerents  would  undoubtedly  be  to  impose 
on  the  neutral  governineut  the  ol»lig  ition  of  preventing  contraband 
from  ever  being  shipped  by  its  own  citizens ;  au(l  this  would  have 
the  further  advantage  of  abolishing  the  right  of  search,  which,  since 
the  general  adoption  of  the  rule  that  neutral  goods  are  safe  in 
enemy's  .ships  and  enemy's  goods  in  neutral  vessels,  only  exists  for 
contraband.  This,  it  may  be  added,  is  the  course  advocated  by 
many  eminent  publicists,  and  mo  far  as  vessels  are  concerned  it 
would  seem  to  have  been  adopted  in  the  recent  IJritish  Neutrality 
act. 

By  the  law  of  nations,  as  now  understood,  though  munitions  of 
war  may  be  sold  in  a  neutral  country  to  be  useil  ai:ain>t  a  State  at 
peace  with  it,  yet  it  is.held,  and  all  the  late  controversy  turns  on 
considerations  connected   therewith,  that  a  ship  is  not  in  the  same 


\ii 


I 


^"<*^»B«. 


1^ 


20 

ciilegoiy,  and  that  tliuHgh,aN  we  have  saiil,  she  may  he  »eiital)i<.a«l 

to  8eek  a  purchaser,  slie  cannot  Iw  nohj  nt  home   to   a   helligeifnt. 

I  have  not   l.een  ahlc  to  see  any  other  gioniid  for  the  di-^tinetion 

than  that  whiili  connects  it«eir  with  the  well  recorrnized  rule  which 

forbids,  in  all  cases,  a  neutral  to  permit  his  territory  to  be  used  as 

the  Itase  of  hostile  operations.     There  is  here   no   difJerence   as  to 

the  breach  of  neutrality,  whether  the  .^i.tiin.  1...  made  in  neutral 

waters  by  a  vessel  wherever  fitted  out,  or  on  the  liiijh   seas,   wIk-m 

the  cruiser  has  been  built  or  fitted  out  in  a  neutral  port.     It  is  the 

power  of  carrying  on  war,  when  le..vi„g  the  neutral  port,  which 

essentially  distinguishes  the  sale   of  a   si,:;,  in  the  neutral  country 

from  the  sale  of  munitions  of  war,  which,  by    hemscivt's  wculd  be 

of  no  avail.    It  is  unneccessary  to  say  that  a  mere  technical  evasion 

—as  by  sailing  unarmed  and  taking  the  guns  on  bjard  outside  of 

the  port— in  nowise  alters  the  position  of  the  parti.'s,  according  to 

tlie  law  of    nations,  whatever  its  effect  may  Ik-  in   construiirg  a 

municipal  statute. 

1  would  not.  however,  l)e  understood  to  contend  that  it  would 
be  the  duty  or  even  tiie  right  of  a  neutral  to  pursiR.  the  (.rt'ei.ding 
belligerent  beyond  his  own  territorial  limits  t„r  a  violation  of 
neutrality  within  his  iurisdicti..n,  and  ..ur  own  courts  have  held 
that  thougli  restitution  would  be  ma-le  ..f  the  property  uidawfuljy 
taken,  wlien  bruught  within  our  power,  we  have  not  the  jinht  to 
award  damages  .against  the  c!»ptor,  or  to  p-oceed  against  a~voss*.l 
itsi-lt;  whether  a  public  ship  or  a  privateer,  having  the  sovereign's 
C(,mmission.  wiiich  had  (.ffeiided  against  our  neutrality.  The 
coursf  of  England,  in  following  the  i'ortugese  expe.btion.'in  ]h-2<), 
to  Terceir.'i,  was  condemne.l,  in  his  place  in  I'.arliamen',  bv  that 
eminent  expounder  of  international  law.  .Sir  .Fames  .Mackintosh. 

Viewed  in  the  light  in  which  wi-  have  been  ciisidering  it,  there 
is  no  difference  in  j-nnciple  between  uiir  duty  to  Kngland,  >o 
promptly  recognized  at  the  commencement  of  the  French  revo>a. 
tion.  and  the  obligations  of  that  country  to  us  during  the  lato 
civil  war,  though  the  circumstances  were  ditrerent.  I  particularly 
refer  to  what  occurred  in  the  time  of  \V.ishi„gton,  because  the 
I'nited  States  then  h.-id  no  neutrality  laws,— the  first  act  havin.' 
been  passe.l  in  1  TIM,— and  whatever  was  d.u.e  was  based  on  the 
law  of  nations.  The  Tnited  States  were  then  neutral,  but  thev 
were  bound  by  the  treaty  of  177S  with  Kr.ance,  made  long  Ijeforo 
the  existing  war,  and  which  has  been  alluded  to  as  giving  to  her  the 


\ 


\  d 


imt;^^,'!'' 


th;it  it  woiiM 


21 

riglit,  cxclnsivi'  of  licr  fnotnieH,  of  bringing  her  prizes  into  the  portt 


<»f  thf  Uiiite<l   Stat 


'I'l 


10  gnt'vnnce  was  not  that  she  sent  her 


prizoH  there,— a  right  which  Enghtiid  did  not  diHpiite,— hut  that 
she  used  our  ports  for  the  jturposo  of  fitting  out  privateem  to 
cruize  airainst  English  commerce  and  that  captures  were  made 
within  our  limits. 

No  prizes  made  by  confederate  vessels,   whether  fitted  out  in 
English  ports  or  not,  were  brought  within  FJritish  jurisdiction  and 
consecjutntly  no   restitution  in   sperie,  as   in  our  case,  could   be 
made.     They  were  kept  ..ut  by   a  gcneial   prohibition,  to  which 
reference  has  been  made  as  entitling  England  tf»  some   regard   on 
our  part;  but  the  depredatirms  on  our  commerce,  by  cruisers  fitted 
out  or  built  ill  England,  in  the  bmiimg  nf  our  vessels  at  soa,   were 
not    less  disastrous  than   if   an   English  asylum   ha<I    been    open 
to  tJiem.     Though  the  French  prizes  were  brought  into  our  ports, 
and  were  therefore  in  a  certain  sens*',   within   our  power,   it   was 
not,  liiside  the  danger  that  we  incurred  from  France,  an  easv  task 
for  om-  government  to  comply  with   the  demands  for  restitution. 
Nice  questions  were  raised  as  to  the  respective  powers  of  the  ex- 
ecutive and  judiciary  in  such  cases,     (icneral  W'ashingion  did  not, 
however,  rest  his  coinse  as  to  a  foni.^n  nation,  on  any  technical 
grtiund  Jiot  defensible  undci  the  law  of  nation'*;  l>ut   it   was  onlv 
through    the  exorcise,  by  our   adniiralty  courts,    of  a  power,  for 
which  Si"  Travers  TwIsh  says  no  Eiiu'lish  precedent   can  be  found 
since  the   time   of   Sir   Lionel   .FenkiiH,  that   the   restitution    was 
crtected.     Such  an  exercise  of  power  by  our  courts  was  conlV'ssedly 
an  exception  to  the  general  lulc,  that  the  trial  of  captures  on  the 
high  seas  belongs  evcliixively  to  the  courts  of  the  nation  to  which 
the  captors  belong.     Our  courts,   however,  helo,  and  continue  to 
h:)ld,  that  if  the  eapture  be  made  within  the  territorial  linuts  of  a 
neutral  count ly  into  which  the  prize  is  brought,  or  by  a  privateer 
wliieh   has  been   iliegally  e.|iiippe<l    in    such   neutral   country,    the 
prize  courts  of  that  country  not  only  po.ssess  the  power,  but  it   i.s 
their  duty  to  restore  the  property  to  the  owner.     This  was  done 
to  the  private  claimant,  though  thi>  propriety  of  that  course,  with- 
out the   intervention  of  his  government,  has   been   <|uestioned   by 
.lu-lge  Story.     Not  only  was    restitution   nnide    where   the    prizes 
wert-    within   our   territory,   whenever  that  couhl   be   done  with- 
out involving  us   in    a   contlict    with    France,  but   where    it   could 
not,  compensation  in  speeilied  '/ases   was   nnele    bv    us   under  the 


i 


i    II 


^vlj 


'""^'''ymtm'-- 


22 


tronty  of  1791 : 


iliii'li  will  artonl  t-t  tl.o  Uriti«li  High    d 


#- 


" 


I 


'] 


!  ■  I 


iniHsioiiiTN  a  prcceiU'iit,  if  tliuir  cmiiihu  hIkjiiM  I»u  (|uuHliuiitMl   in 
their  own  country. 

The  o<)rie!«|M»iiiK'ncp  hetwt'cn  the  two  govcrnmentH  after  the 
Ahtb'.iina  eseaiied  in  ISO'.',  intorf<|i('rHe(l  with  ('un)|ilaints  ahoiit  pre- 
mature recognition,  was  mainly  taken  up  with  aecoimtH  of  Mr. 
A(iamH*M  eAortH  to  in<Iuue  the  KiigliMh  eoiirts  to  carry  into  ofTuct 
their  own  neutrality  laws,  while  wo  were  met  hy  being  remimleil 
of  similar  reclamations  maile  on  us  hy  the  .Spanish  and  Portuguese 
governments  during  the  revolutions  in  South  America. 

Contrary  to  tlie  cuurso  of  the  United  Stntos  in  coiiKding  the  ex- 
ecuti«)n  of  her  neutrality  acts,  including  tliat  of  1811,  to  the  ad- 
miralty courts,  the  Knglish  .ict  of  iHiJJ  gave  jurisdiction  to  the 
common  law  courts;  ami  the  case  of  the  Ale.\:indra,  which  was  for- 
mally decided  in  favor  of  the  defendant,  though  the  opinions  o(  the 
judges  of  the  Court  of  Kxchecpier  were  divideil  on  a  technical 
(question  of  con>;lruction,  produced  an  irritation  in  the  minds  ol' 
the  American  people  which  neither  the  decision,  in  a  contrary 
sense,  of  a  Scotch  court,  nor  even  the  interposition  of  the  g.»vern- 
ment  in  the  purch.ase  of  the  Anglo-Chinese  sipiidron,  supposed  to 
he  intended  for  the  South,  h;id  any  effect  in  allaying.  In  our  di- 
]ilomatic  correspondence,  if  it  be  permitted  iiere  to  make  any 
comment  on  it,  it  would  seem  to  be  a  matter  to  bo  noticed  that  we 
allowed  ourselves  to  be  drawn  into  a  discussion  whether  the  Kn- 
glish laws  hail  or  had  not  been  executed,  thus  apparently  w-th- 
drawingtheca.se  from  its  only  true  test,  the  law  of  nations. 

That  the  United  States  had  at  le.ist  a  ftn'mti  fttcie  cl.iim  for 
indemnity  is  admitted  by  the  preamble  of  the  first  article  of  tly> 
treaty,  expressing  the  regret  of  her  .Majesty's  government  "  for  the 
e8caj)e,  under  whatever  circumstances,  of  the  Alab una  and  other 
vessels  from  Hritish  ports,  an<l  for  the  depredations  committed  by 
those  vessels." 

Nor  since  Karl  Russell,  during  whose  administration  of  the  De. 
partment  of  Foreign  AfT.iirs  thi  so  untoward  events  occurred,  has 
there  been  any  indisposition  to  submit  the  questions  arising  from 


the  Al.'tbama  claims — as  well  as  others  whicu 


.1.  -.u'm'  cts  or  citi- 


zens of  the  one  country  liad  against  the  gov  .'(mm  jic  >  i  the  other  •< 
to  international  adjudication. 

A  proposition  tor  a  treaty  to  settle  gener.d  claims  was  made  by 
Mr.  Seward   in    186"-J,  before  the  Aliibaiuu  matter  ar<we.     It    wa* 


ijnjf.cls  or   fiti- 
:  of  tlie  ollior 


23 

rcnt'wo.l  by  Lonl  Kimw.)!  in  ISOr),  hut  he  RtMte<l  thnt  in  hiw  pro- 
poMJil  thf  Ah»h:»m!i  unJ  ulhor  Niniil.ir  cUims  wurt*  not  include*!- 
In  March  1H»J7,  however,  Lord  Stanley  Kuhtnitted  n  propoHition 
fur  a  liniife.l  reference  to  arhitrnlion  in  the  so-called  Aliil)!inia 
cUiniM,  and  adjudi(  lion,  hy  meant  of  a  mixed  commission,  of 
general  claims;  a  proposition  which  HeeiuH  to  have  lM..en  the  prec- 
edent for  that  which  led  to  the  appointment  of  the  nij,di  C^nimin- 
sion.  That  the  matter  then  failed  arose  from  th"  pernistency  of 
Mr.  Seward  in  maintainiiii,',  despite  the  remonstrance  of  Mr. 
AdaniH,  that  the  nation, »l  injuries  suHtaincI  hy  the  United  States 
from  what  was  declared  to  he  the  premature  recognition  ot  the 
confederate  iH'lligerency,  should  he  embraced  in    the  arrangement, 

Lord  Stanley  ha<l,  in  Xovemlier  preceeding,  said  that  her  Ma- 
jesty's government  could  not  consent  to  refer  to  a  foreign  power 
to  determine  wlitther  the  policy  of  recogtii/itig  the  <-onfiMlerate 
helligercncy  was  or  was  not  Buitalile  to  the  circumstances  of  the 
time  when  that  recognition  was  made.  Mr.  Seward,  in  answer, 
said  that  the  [Fniti-d  States  government  would  not  olijecl  to  arbi- 
tration, but  wouM  expect  to  r<-ler  the  controversy  just  as  it  is 
found  in  the  correspomlenci-  which  had  taken  place  between  the 
two  governments,  with  such  further  evidence  and  arguments  a» 
either  party  mi),'ht  desire,  without  imposinii  restrictions  upiui  the 
umpire.  'I'o  such  an  unlimited  reference  Lord  Stanley  objected 
for  this,  among  other  reasons,  tint  it  would  com[iel  the  submission 
of  the  very  .|uesti-»n  which  he  had  already  saiil  he  could  not  ngreo 
to  submit.  , 

Further  negotiations  on  this  subject  were  post|ioiie  I  to  the  nat- 
urali/.ition  and  San  .Fuan  conventions.  Mr.  .Fohnson,  in  going  to 
London  in  l«tW,  was  instructed  that  those  questions  mu-Jt  be  ar- 
ranged before  any  discussi,,!,  on  the  i-liiin- convention  could  bo 
entertaine.l.  Whatever  evciltMnent  niiglu  ln\e  heretofore  prevail- 
ed  as  to  the  rights  ,,f  naturalized  citizens,  the  present  importance, 
in  the  view  of  the  .\meiic an  people,  of  the  former  of  tiiese  mat- 
ters would  seem  to  have  been  exaggerated.  The  law  officers  of 
the  crown  (leclared  that  no  natur.alization  .-onvention  could  be 
made  without  alTecting  essentially  the  operations  ,jf  the  laws  of 
descent  an.l  of  many  other  portions  of  the  common  law,  .'uid  they 
suggested  that  similar  changes  in  the  law  i>f  the  American  States 
which  retained  the  common  law,  would  be  necessary.  A  c(mven- 
tion  which  had  been  prece  led  by  a  protocol,  in  order  to  await  the 


i:  •iit^'^.imit.iiSSM^i^.  ~.:^ . 


-■■.  aa;*i»ii«i*i.'  i-tiC^**! 


'^^fmmti^l. 


\i 


n\ 


i 


I 


24 


action  of  Pailiiuciit,  w:is  cuticIiKlod,  Murcli  13,  1S70,  a  statute 
making  lliu  rutjuiiod  changes  in  tlit-  law  having  pa.sseil  tlu'  pri'ceed- 
ing  (Jay;  yot  it  would  aj)j)ear  from  ;lio  ilehales  in  tiie  Now  Vork 
Sunuto,  that,  when  an  act  was  introiiuced  at  the  late  session  to 
make  the  laws  of  liiat  Stale  conform  to  tiie  treaty  I>y  mlopting 
an  act  founded  on  the  Kiiglisij  statute,  the  Senator,  whose  argu- 
ment had  a  controlling  iiitluenoe,  was  ignorant  alike  of  the  con- 
vention, and  of  the  Expatriation  act  ot  Cvuigress,  wliich  had 
induced  tlie  Federal  government  to  (Conclude  it.* 

The  requisite  protocols  having  been  signed  on  both  the  other 
subjects,  Mr.  Johnson  attempted  an  arr.ingenient  of  a  Claims  con- 
vention, in  a  mode  by  which  to  avoid  any  mention  of  the  appar- 
ently irreconcil.ible  views  of  the  two  countries.  This,  Mr.  Johnson 
tells  us,  was  accomplished  as  well  in  the  treaty  of  November  10, 
1868,  wliidi  was  rejected  by  the  President  without  being  sub  uit- 
ted  to  the  Senate,  as  in  that  of  the  14lh  of  January,  lS<;;t,  by  the 
general  terms  of  the  reference  ot  all  claims  arising  since  Isfj.'J  of  the 
citizens  of  the  one  State  on  thegovernment  of  the  other,  whether  oi 
not  arising  out  of  the  civil  war.  A  clause  was  inserteilat  Mr.  Se- 
ward's .special  suggestion,  in  the  second  arliehf  of  the  treaty  of 
January  14,  lSt)l>,  re<piiring  that  ''the  oHirial  correspomlenco 
which  has  taken  place  between  the  two  govi-rnmcnts,  resj)ei'ling 
any  claims,  shall  be  l.iid  before  the  commi.ssion."  This,  it  was 
suppo.ssd,  would  secure  the  notice  of  the  subject  of  rebel  belliger- 
ency by  the  soverign,  whose  appointment  for  the  purpose  of  the 
Alabama  claims,  so-called,  (which  though  particularly  named,  were 
inchnled  in  a  general  reference,)  was  contemplated,  an  ordinary 
umjiire,  chosen  by  the  parties  or  by  lot,  serving  in  the  other  cases. 

Hut  though  the  alleged    heinous   offence  of  (Jreat  Britain,  in  re- 
gard to  the  recognition  of  the  lielligerent  rights,  was  con  loned  by 


*Tlie  conflict  ot  the  nAtiiraUiatioii  treaties  ot  tho  lTiiite<l  St*tM  with  Ilia  S'ate  Uw*,  M- 
|>ecl«lly  with  tluiHo  11.'  Ilie  Sum  it  N.!»  V>rl«,  rel*tivo  lo  i)i«  trinisuii»<lim  ut'rail  «^t  it«  1.1 
8110111.,  wm.  tliK  mliji'i  t  "fa  tr«,itliM>.  liy  Itui  iire«.'nl  writer,  in  I1TI  Tim  iitVirl  w.»s  *•>  fur 
•iHceHHiiil  nR  111  iBR.I.oti  lli«  ra  •.iiiiiin.iiijuli.in  nl'tlif  O  iveriH)r  M.itl'iii.iin  ti  tti«  rein  i»»l  oC 
>lli>al>iiitlc'»  friirii  Aiin;rli:«ii  wniiien  iiririii-U  iitirnail.  .\ii  mt  wim  i.,i^HO.I,  Marrli  M.  r<7l,  l)y 
tlic  LfiKiitliiture  of  Now  Yn  l(.  tn  autliorize  tliu  <leiti>etit  iif  laiii  e*Ulti  to  f.iuiln  rlli«.in»  of 
tlio  I'lilto-I  Slates  iinl  lln-ir  il«t.'«ii  laii('<,  nolwitliHiainlliiij  tlutlr  miiriiiij.i  wlili  iilltinii. 
Kurllior  lt'i;liilaliiiii.  Imwivtr.  in  iiwi-Kiiiiry.  to  iiialiu  llie  lam  ot  tliat  Slat.s  M|i«i:ii»lly  m  (o 
tlie  ilemeiit  lit re:il  e..tatu,  li  »riii  mi/..-  witli  tli«  tru^nii'ii  witti  Kii^l.iinl  (iiul  .itiiBi  poworn.  It 
wiiiil.l  m-eiii  lliut  .'ViTi  till'  KiiKli»li  naliirsllz  itl.ni  ai:t.  iihuhcI  In  aniliiiutlon  ot  tin-  trcnty 
with  the  riilirl  Stale:.,  Iiua  not  iiii>l  all  Ihi-  roiithitiiiucloii  lur  wliirh  it  wiu  iiilumlu.l  to 
provide.— .V«  Solicitori'  Journal,   fnl.  .VJ7.  /).i727. 


\ 


z-) 


the  autlior  of  tlio  ooiupliiiiit,  it  wms  no.  so  hv  the  vory  ar'roin|ilish- 
cmI  Hoholar  tlicii  at  thu  licul  of  tliu  Committei'  on  Foreign  Aftairn, 
ami  to  whom  it  is  impossible  to  impute  ignorance,  either  of  politi- 
cal history  or  of  the  rules  of  internntional  law.  As  Mr.  Sumner's 
speech,  presenting  a  n\ost  formiilalile  hill  of  imlictmeitt  against 
Great  liritain,  at  the  head  ot  which  ho  jilaces  the  Queen's  proi-Ia- 
ination  of  neutrality,  anil  from  t'n*  conseoueni-e  of  which  he  de- 
duces  cl-'ims,  not  only  for  Mie  destruction  of  property  by  the 
confederate  cruisers  but  for  untold  millions  foi  the  expenses  of  tlie 
j>rotracted  war,  was  pnbhsheil  with  the  I'onsent  of  the  Senate,  we 
are  bound  to  ascribe  ti>  his  reasoning  tlie  nearly  unanimous  rejec- 
tion of  .Mr.  Johnson's  treaty.  Mr.  Mi)lley,  moreover,  in  his  earlier 
intercourse  with  li  )rd  Clarendon,  statcil,  with  respect  to  the 
treaty:  ''The  tinu'  at  which  it  was  signed  «.is  thought  most  in- 
opportune, as  the  late  President  and  his  government  were  virtual- 
ly out  lif  ofhcc  ami  their  successuis  could  not  be  consulted  on  this 
grave  (piestion.  The  conventinn  w.is  further  objecteil  to  because 
it  embraceil  only  the  claims  of  individuals  and  had  no  ivference 
to  those  of  the  two  governments  on  each  other;  and  lastly,  that 
it  settled  no  (|Ueslion  and  l.-iid  down  no  principle." 

Nor  did  till'  prospects  of  :idjnslment  seem  to  have  been  much 
imprcved  by  the  inauguration  of  the  new  administration.  While 
not  basing  our  rights  to  redress  tor  the  Alabama  claims  solely  <>n 
the  artion  of  tiie  IJiilish  governiuent  at  the  commencement  of  the 
secession,  the  American  gmeinment  continued  to  consider  the 
rei'ognition  as  ;iu  unfritHidly  proeeeding  and  leading  to  other  con- 
seipiences  for  which  claims  for  indemnity  were  due.  The  course 
of  the  American  Minister  at  London  in  exaggerating  his  instruc- 
tions on  I'lis  point,  and  in  .assuming,  as  it  were,  the  prerogative  of 
m.iking  war  in  his  menaces  to  the  IJritish  government,  had  induced 
.1  state  of  things  which  seemed  to  render  any  further  attempt  at 
negotiations  impraiticable ;  but  the  reasons  assigned  for  his  recall, 
and  in  wliich  hi-*  co\irse  was  fully  disivowed,  having  salistie<l  the 
government  of  tireat  Uril.iin  that  a  change  of  policy  had  oc-cur- 
reil  at  Washington,  a  measure,  in  appointing  a  board  of  commis- 
sioners, eminent  for  their  rank  and  public  station,  to  meet 
plenipotentiaries  on  the  p.art  of  the  United  States,  w.is  inaugurated, 
thereby  sliowing  the  importance  attached  l)y  Kngl.ind  to  the 
maintenance  of  friendly  rel.itioiis  with  the  United  States.  It  has 
resulted   in  a  treaty  now  bet'ore  the  Senate  for  r.atiticalion,  which, 


III 


26 


If 


iliii 


instead  ol  being  <onfinctl  to  a  single  point,  sots  nt  rest  all  those 
(jiiestions  which  have  so  repeateilly  given  rise  to  angry  (iisciissions 
between  the  two  powers. 

The  treaty  proposes,  as  in  the  original  suggestion  of  Lord  Stan- 
ley  in  18G7,  a  special  reference  of  the  Alabama  claims.  Five  arbi- 
trators are  to  be  named,  one  each  by  the  United  States,  Great 
Britain,  the  King  of  Italy,  tlu'  President  of  the  Swiss  Confe<lera- 
tion,  and  the  Emperor  ot  iJrazil,  or  in  case  of  the  omission  of  either 
of  the  three  last  name.l  sovereigns,  by  the  King  of  Sweden  and 
Norway  They  are  to  (Ictermine  as  to  each  vessel  separately 
whether  Great  Britain  had  fiiled  to  fulfil  the  .luties  set  forth  by 
the  prescribed  rules  lai.l  down  in  the  treaty,  an<l  if  so  they  may 
award  a  sum  in  gross  to  be  distributed  by  the  United  States,  or 
they  may  agree  that  a  board  of  assessors  to  be  appointed  by  the 
President, by  Ifer  IJritauic  ^[ajesty,  and  by  the  Kinir  of  rialv,"shall 
ascertain  and  determine  what  claims  are  vali.l,  and  what  amount 
or  amounts  shall  be  paiil  by  (Jreat  Hritain  to  the  Unite.!  States, 
on  account  of  the  lial)ility  arising  from  sucli  failure,  as  to  each 
vessel,  according  to  the  extent  of  such  lia!»i!ity  as  decided  by  the 
arbitrators.  What  ought  to  commend  this  portion  of  the  treat  v  to 
us  is  that  the  rules  which  are  to  be  the  basis  of  th,- adjudication 
are  essentially  the  same  as  were  adopted  by  our  govrnment  in 
the  Presidency  of  W.ashington,  and  when  Jefferson  was  Secretary 
of  State.     Their  importance  will  justify   inserting  them  entire. 

"  A  neutral  government  is  boiin.l,"  it  is  said,  "First,  to  use  due 
diligence  to  prevent  the  fitting  out,  arming,  or  equipping,  within 
its  jurisdiction.  ..f  any  vessel  which  it  has  reasonable  groun.l  to 
believe  is  intended  to  cruise  or  carry  on  w.ir  against  a  power  with 
which  it  is  at  peace;  and  also  to  use  like  diligence  t..  prevent  the 
departure  from  its  jurisdiction  of  any  vessel  inte-uled  to  .ruiso  or 
carry  <>n  war  as  ab(n-e,  such  vessel  fiaving  been  speciallv  adapte.l, 
in   whole  or   in   part,  within  such  jurislielion  to  warlike  use. 

"Secondly, not  to  permit  or  sufTer  either  b.-lligereiit  to  make  use 
of  its  p.n-ts  or  waters  as  the  base  of  naval  operations  against  the 
other,  or  for  the  purpose  .,f  the  renewal  or  augmentation  of  mili- 
tiry  supplies  or  arms  or  the  recruitment  of  men.* 


-^Simm^ 


MMW 


It  rest  all  those 
igry  discussions 

1  of  Lord  Stan- 
Ills.     Five  arbi- 
1   States,  Great 
visa  Confedera- 
lission  of  either 
i)f  Sweden  and 
ssel    separately 
>s  set  forth   by 
if  so  tlioy  may 
ifod   States,   or 
pointed  by  the 
i?  of  Italy,  shall 
what  ainoiiiit 
I'liited  States, 
ure,  ns  to  each 
lecided  by  the 
if  the  treaty  to 
te  adjudication 
govrnnient  in 
was  Secretary 
(hem  entire. 
'irst,  to  use  due 
i|)pinj;,    within 
able  ground  to 
t  a  power  with 
to  prevent  the 
?d   to  ('ruise  or 
oially  adapted, 
rlike  use. 
Ill  to  ni;ike  use 
ns  against  the 
ation   of  inili- 


liKi  hImi  I)«>ii  iiiaile 
'iicrBl  pMlilliMloii  iif 
I",  w.-  ililiik  iliere  la 
'  lli«f  llie('lniii^>  mn 
K-rnilcinK.  nl  wlil,li 
ttmt  cUiiw  in  cull- 


27 

"Thirdly,  to  exercise  due  diligence  in  its  own  waters,  ami  ait  to 
all  persons  within  its  jurisdiction,  to  prevent  any  violation  ot  the 
foregoing  oldig.itions  ami  iluties."  ' 

Though  it  is  dedareil  in  the  treaty  that  the  British  government 
cannot  admit  that  the  rules  which  are  thus  established  were  in 
force  at  the  time  when  the  claims,  to  which  it  is  agreed  that  they 
should  apply,  arose,  yet  they  are  not  only  to  be  recognized  as 
liereafter  bintliiig  between  the  two  nations,  but  their  intluencc  is 
jdedged  to  have  them  acknowledged  l»y  all  the  other  Stales. 

The  sanction  of  the  English  gi)vernment  has  been,  indeed,  given 
to  meaHure.s  even  more  >tringenl.  So  far  back  as  January  1807, 
a  commission  was  appointid  consisting  of  some  of  the  most  emi- 
nent Knglish  jurists,  including  I'liillimore,  Twiss,  and  Vernon 
Ilarcourt,  all  high  authorities  in  international  law,  and  to  which 
Mr.  Abbot,  (now  Lord  Tenlerdcii)  was  attached  in  the  capacity 
that  he  at  present  holds  to  ihe  High  Commission  at  Wasliington. 
The  result  of  their  labors  was  eui'iodied  in  the  act  of  Dlh  of 
August  1870,  tiie  passage  of  which  was  hastened  by  the  Franco- 
I'russian  war.  This  .act  prohibit.s  the  building,  or  causing  to  be  built, 
by  any  j»erson  within  Her  Majesty's  dominions  any  ship  with  infi'iit 
or  knowledge  of  its  being  eiujiloye  1  in  the  military  or  naval  ser- 
vice of  any  foreign  Slate,  at  war  with  any  tVien  Uy  Stale;  issuing 
or  delivering  any  commission  for  any  such  ship;  etpiipping  any 
such  ship,  or  dispalcliiiig  or  causing  any  such  slii|i  It)  be  dispatcheil 
for  such  purpose.  It  is  dfserving  of  notice  tliat  Mr.  Vernon 
Ilarcourt  dissented  to  that  portion  of  the  report  of  the  commis- 
sioners that  applied  to  the  prohibition  of  sliip  building.  Jurisdiction 
in  cases  uii  ler  the  act,  is  given  to  tlie  Court  of  A  Imiraiity, 
which  is  not  the  least  important  amendment  of  the  law.* 

Tlie  propo.sed  reference,  in  istij,  liy  Mr.  Sewanl,  to  a  mixed 
commission  reache  I  all  claims  of  the  cili/ens  or  .subjects  of  the  one 
country  on  the  government  of  the  other  smee  ISnl},  and  such 
also  was  the  provision  of  the  convemions  negotiated  by  Mr.  John 
son.  It  does  not  appear  why  the  authority  of  tlie  commis.sion  lor 
the  cl.iinis,  ()ther  than  the  Alabima  claims,  is  now  less  comprehen- 
sive, though  its  practical  etfect  is  to  pteclude  any   claims  tor  the 


•sir  K«i  er  Plilllimort-,  In  (lie  »ecmii|  eilltimi  nf  liiii  ruinint'iifcirlen,  reoenlly  |iublii>htHl, 
!n  iiotlfiiia  !»'>  iiu-og  .ltf.l(le  I  1')  liiiii.  miller  llm  lureiijii  iMilintiiu'iil  m  ul  1870,  rite*  lbs 
wiiriUur  our  loxi  a|>|ir<iviiig  ,>(  the  (raimltir  »(  juriwilctiuii  tn  tlie  Cuurt   'l  Ailoiiralty, 


l^ 


i 


«. 


>>^lmmim^:^ 


mm* 


■•***,»?»****•'■■ 


H- 


28 

Fenian  raids  into  Canada,  whith  were   presented  by  the    British 
Commiijsioners,  but  withdrawn.     They   did   not  orcur  till  18GG. 
Sir  Edward  Thornton,  in  his  note  to  Mr.  Fish,  of  February  1, 1871, 
only  refers  to  claims  arising  out  of  acts  conunitted  duiing  the  civil 
war.     By  the  terms  of  the  Convention,  it  applic-s  to  claims  arising 
out  of  acts  committed  "against  persi.ns  and  proj^erty"  .luring  the 
period  between  the  13th  of  April,  IHGI.  and  the  9th  of  April,  1865 
These  claims  are  referred  to  a   con.mission  of  three  members,  one 
to  be  appointed  by  the  Queen,  one  by  the  Presi.ient,  an<l  the  third 
by  the  two  governments  conjointly,  or  if  tliey  cann  jt  agree  within 
the  prescribed  time,  by  the  representative  of  the  King  of  Spain,  at 
Washington. 

It  has  been  objected  to  this  commission  that   claims  might  be 
preferred  for  slaves  liberated  at  the  south,  and  for  injuries  susTtained 
by  Englishmen,  domiciled  or  otherwise   there,   in  conse.iuence  of 
the  ravages  of  the   wa--,  and    in  cases  in  wlii,-!,   American  citizens 
could  have  no  claims.     IJoth  of  thcs.-  objcctiuns  are,  however,  un- 
tenable,  as  .lealing  in  slaves,  or  even  owning  them,  has  long  been 
made,  on  the  part  of  an  English  subject,  no  matter  where  ife  may 
be    resident,  a  felony  ;  and  since    Mv.  .Marcy's   note  of  February, 
1857,  to  M.  de  Sartiges,  on  account  of  the  destruction  of  property 
at  the  bombardment  of  Greytown,  it  is  no  longer  a  .piestion  but 
that  f.Meigners  must  take  the  same  risk  as  to  their  property,  in    a 
country  exposed  to  the  hazards  of  war,  as  the  inli.abitanls  .lu.     This 
note  was  not  only  deemed  cMuclasive  by  France,  whose  claims  were 
withdrawn,  but  was  referred  to  in  the  English  Farli.unent  bv  Lord 
Palmerst.Mi,  as    being  unanswerable.     (Lawrence's    Wheaton,   'Jd 
Ed.,  174).  Ihave  cited  in  my  ( '"//(///d///^/(V(",  tom.  Ill,  p  T.'S  from  the 
Anmuiire  tfes  lMu.f  Moiuhs  and    Amuunrc  ,k    Ltsur,  the  ca^'s, 
occuring  in  -849-50  of  the  reclamations  of  England  at'vaples  an.l' 
Florence  oi.  acc...int  of  losses  sustaine.l  by  her  su)ij*-cts  du'rini.  t!i0 
civil  comiiioti..ns  i„  Italy,  and  in  whi.'h  Au>t.ia  and    If-isMa  iT.ter- 
vened  ..„  behalf  of  those  States.     The  answers  of  the  English  g.,v- 
ernment  to  their  subjects   ii,    France   during  the   FrancoTprusIian 
war,  eschewed  all  interve;ition  for  losses  snAl.vined  bv  them  :  and 
the  views  there  expressed   w.-uld  be  applicable  to  anv  similar  i  le- 
tetis.oMs  of  Englishmen   fur  pn.perty   t..ken  or  destr-ved   in    our 
civil  war,  as  the  result  ..f   hostilities.     So  far  as  regards  mariiime 
pn/.es,it  IS  a  well  recognized  priiMipl...  th.at  no  elaim  can  be  m.ide 
on  the  guvernment  of  the   captor,   till    ail   the  remedies  provi.led 


29 

tliroi  gli  till'   Trize  Courts  liavo  been  oxliauNted,  anil  then  only   in 
case  of  a  "ci/nre  contrary  to  the  law  ol' nations. 

With  ro»|.ci-t  tr)  tho  fi>lK.iieH.  As  in  1818,  liberty  was  snbstituted 
\\>Y  n'<//i(,  a  word  for  which  John  Adams  so  earnestly  contended 
at  the  treat}  ot  ITjsU,  and  the  |.er)M'tiial  cliaracter  uf  which  right 
was.  as  we  conceivt?,  so  clearly  established  by  John  (inincy  Adams, 
there  is  not  nr>w,  nor  was  there  when  the  reciprocity  treaty  was 
neg.itiated  by  Lord  Klvtin  and  Secretary  Marcy  in  1854,  any  longer 
a  question  of  princi|.le  involved,  but  a  mere  matter  of  bargain,  tlio 
details  of  which  it  is  not  necessary  to  e.vaniine  here.  This  last 
remark  is  a|.|.liea)»le  to  other  [Mirtinns  of  the  treaty,  as  those  ro- 
s|iectiiig  the  transit  of  <,'oo  Is  and  other  ficilities  of  tnnle.* 

The  articles,  as  to  the  fisheries, as  well  as  the  one  resi^ectiiig  the  re- 
ciprocal transit  of  goods  between  the  Llnited  States  and  the  British 
North  American  possessions,  nre  not  to  go  intoetVect  till  the  neoes- 
sary  laws  shall  be  passed  by  the  Imperial  Parliament,  the  Parlia- 
ment of  Canada,  an<l  the  Legislature  of  Prince  K-lward  Island  on 
the  one  hand,  an. 1  by  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  on  the 
other.  These  articles  are  to  remain  in  force  for  ten  years,  and 
further,  until  the  expiration  of  two  years,  (which  is  snbstilnted  for 
twelve  months  in  the  former  treaty. )  afler  either  party  has  i^iven 
notice  to  terminate  the  same.  There  is  no  reference  in  the  treaty 
to  the  fisheries  of  the  Pacific  co.ist  nor  to  the  fisheries  of  the 
(ireat  Lakes. 

The  application  of  the  ai  tides  as  to  the  lisheiies  is  ma.le  contin- 
gent with  respect  to  Newfoundland,  upon  the  action  of  the  Impe- 
rial !»arlianu>nt.  the  Legislature  of  Newfo.u.dland,  and  the  Con- 
gress of  the  I'nited  Stat. vs.  It  will  be  recollected  that  a  conven- 
ti..n  made  between  France  and  Kngland,  in  iSoT,  on  the  subject  of 


Mt  1,*1  bwii  cnmen.lfl  l.y  Ameri.  .„■  ,mt.lki.ls,  tlm,,^,],  ,|„.  ,.„|,„  ,|.,e«  „„,  ,^,,  ,„  ,„  ,,  ,^.^ 
Lw-n  ,|i*.,u!Hsl  l«.r..r..  »„.  .■..„>.ni,.i,m,.rH  tl,i».  tlir  CmoutU.u  ..(  HJ8  «„.  »I,r,v,,„.,|  l,v  ,1,9 

treaty.,!  1154  »n.l  il„.t  >vl ,1,hi  trralv  wn,,   t.Ti„mHtr,|  i„  ISfifl.  th.-  treaty  of    Ms  ,v,w 

n.t  rov,,x..l,   but    th,  treaty  .,r  ITV.  «»,.  the  hitter  l.e,.,tf  a  troaty  .,f  ,,artai.,n  it  wa*  not 
Rrteetcl,  It   wi.»  chiliiie.1,  even  l.y  the  wa.  ..f  ISU'. 

The  |.r.,vM,.n.«Motho  extent  .,t  the  tixherie.  ,»re  the  »amo  in  the  treaty  ..t  IsTl  a.  in 
that..  I,s54  In«tea.K.f  >«  reei,.r,«ity  a.  f.  the  n,u„er.,n.  ;,rti.I,.»en,„nerate.l  in  the  treaty 
..t  1S.M,    he  prenent  treaty  r„„.lnes  the  ritfht  ,  f  a.l.niasi,.,,,  .|„tv  fr.v,  In  ea.h  .;..nntrv  ro- 

sKetively   ,„  ,i.„  .,11  „n,l  H,h.    1,  reover  pn.vi.Ie,  („r  the  a,.,„,in,n,e,>t  ,.f  e.Mntnisar'.t.ers 

.  .  etertnine.  hav,,,,.  re„ar,l  ,,.  the  ,,riyileKes .,r,|„.i  hy  the  fi,l,e,l  State,  ...  the  snl.Jeet 

o   !a  ,  i       ""  ;■    ,•'•"!• ."'" '    '"■  '""  -■'■■">--'„„.  whi,  h,  in  thel,  .,,,i, .,4ht 

edut     'V  ;:.•''>:    .:''''■"•''''"•'•  "^''"'"' '" -•'-"   <-  "■«■  ...ivlle,.e.aceonie.l  ,o 


''^4>..?^^_ , 


^V-.*i%s: 


H^aaws^jw"*- 


30 


I!  .'.J 


n 


^i  I  ^ 


the  fishorios,  was  renrl»MC(l  of  no  effbot  on  aroonnt  of  tlie  refusal  of 
tlie  colony  of  Nt'wfoiinrllaml  to  givo  its  assi-nt,  hut  flii"  action  of 
that  colony  will  not,  on  the  |iic,senl  occasion,  allcct  the  rest  of  tlie 
treaty. 

The  northwestern  honmlnry  (as  well  as  the  northeastern,  which 
was  in  conf.Minity  t  a  convention  then  made,  reterre.l  to  the  King 
of  the  Xelherlaiitis)  and  the  navigation  of  the  St.  liavvrence  are 
old  ac(pi!iintances,  having  heen  included  in  the  negotiations  of 
1^20—7,  originally  confided  to  Mr.  IJiifiis  King  and  Mr.  (Jailatiii, 
but  which,  owing  to  the  illness  of  Mr.  King,  ilcvolved  exclusively 
on  the  latter.  The  right.s  of  the  United  States  in  all  these  cases 
were  made  the  suhjects  of  elaborate  memoirs,  with  the  preparation 
of  which,  as  the  secretary  of  the  mis>ioii,  I  became  familiar,  while 
many  matters  connected  witli  these  discussions  were  conliilc<l  to 
nie  on  the  departure  of  Mr.  (i.illatin.  M  that  time  nothin"  fur- 
ther  was  done  as  to  the  i)oundaries  on  the  northwest  coast  than  to 
continue  indefinitely  the  provision  for  Joint  occupancy,  stipulated 
for  in  the  treaty  of  Isls.  Hither  party  was  to  be  at  liberty  to 
abrogate  the  convention  on  a  notice  of  twelve  months  to  the 
other  party. 

A  notic*'  was  aclu.illy  given  by  the  Ignited  Stales,  in  pursu- 
nnce  of  a  re.M)lutiun  of  Coni^rn'ss,  p;i>sed  April  'JTtli,  iS-lCi.  The 
convention  of  June  l^ith  following,  eitablisjiing  the  boundiry  line 
between  the  United  States  and  the  I'.ritish  possessions  west  of  the 
liocky  mount.'iins,  only  l.-ft  to  be  di'tmnincd  a  question,  which 
the  convention  itself  created,  as  to  the  channel  intended  to  bo 
indicated,  separating  Vaneouver'.s  Islan<I  from  the  continent.  By 
the  new  treaty  it  is  loft  to  the  Kmperorof  (icrmany  to  decide  which 
of  the  chiiunels  claimed  is  most  in  aci-ordance  with  the  treaty  of 
184t;. 

At  the  time  of  the  negotiations  of  ISliO — 7,  to  which  I  have  re- 
ferred, the  British  picyipotenti.trics  would  entertain  no  proposition 
founded  on  the  right  of  the  Uiiit«'d  St.itcs  to  navigate  tlu'  Ki\ci' 
St.  Lawrence  to  the  sea.  Nor  was  it  till  tlic  treaty  of  H.M,  that 
any  conventional  arrangement  was  m  ide  on  that  ^iiltject.  Bv  that 
convention,  the  citizens  and  iidiabilants  of  the  United  States  were 
to  have  the  right  to  navigate  the  Uiver  St.  Fi  iwreiice  and  the 
canals  in  Canada  !l^ell  for  conimuisicating  between  the  gre.it  l.ikes 
and  the  Atlantic  Ocean  as  freely  as  the  sid»jeets  of  her  Biitanic 
Majesty,  subject  oidy  to  the  same  rates,  and  Brilisi»  subjects  were 


81 

to  linvc  tJif  right  of  navigating   fieoly  Liko    Mid 


tl 

tinuc.     The    Hritisli    d 


privilogo   of  invigMting  the   River  St.  L 


Hgan  so  long  as 
iiwrerice  ^huiiM  con- 


>irnment   ha<i    reserve<l  the  riiHit  of 


HUS- 


110  notice    to   the 


peniiing  the  [.rivih'ge,  on  their  part,  on  giving   <l ^ 

Unite.l  States,  in  which  case,  tiie  latter  might  suspend,  as  affected 
i.Ia,  the  free  trade  reciprocity  article.     IJy  the    present  treaty, 


the  navigation  oi'  tlu-  Kiver  St.  I 


d  d( 


.aurencc,  ascendinr^  an<l  descent, 
ing,  from  the  45th  p.-inillei  of  north  latitude,  where  it  ceases  to  he 
a  bofindary  between  the  two  countries,  from,  to,  and  into  the  sea, 
shiill  remain  forever  free  and  open  for  onimerce  to  the  citizens  of 
the  rnitc.l  States,  stihject  to  any  laws;,,,,!  ivgulations  of  (ireat 
Britain^  or  Canada  not  inc(.nsistent  with  the  privilege  of  free  naviga- 
tion. The  like  privilege  is  accorde.l  to  the  subjects  of  (ireat  Brit- 
ain for  .he  navigation  of  the  rivers  Yukon,  I'o.cupme  and  Stikine; 
I'Ut  the  navigation  of  Lake  Michigan,  subject  in  like  manner  to  the 
laws  and  regulations  <.t  the  L'nited  States,  is  only  cMiceded  to  the 
subjects  of  (Jreat  Britain  for  the  same  period  as  is  provided  for 
the  fishery  articles.  There  is  a  provision  alsa  as  to  the  use  of  the 
<-anals.  The  British  government  agree  to  urge  on  the  government 
of  Cana<la  to  secure  to  the  Tnited  States  the  use  <.f  ceitain  canals 
on  an  npiality  with  the  inhabitants  of  the  Dominion,  and  the 
United  States  ai^ree  that  British  subjects  shall  have  the  like  use 
of  the  St.  Clair  Flats  Canal,  and  the  President  is  to  urire  on  the 
State  governments  to  secure  to  them  the  State  catials  t~,nnecle<l 
with  the  navigation  of  the  l.ikes  or  rivers  traversed  by  or  conti- 
guous to  the  boundary  between  the  possessions  of  the  two  pc.wers, 

W.  B.  Lawuknck. 


-tt£.- 


■SOTwi        ittr-'ima 


II 


\^1 


To  (he  Editor  of  the  Provuhnce  Journal: 

The  kind  nutii-e  wliirh  you  took  of  my  Iciter  to  tlio  World  on 
the  recent  treaty  witli  Kiiylaml,  in  your  paper  ot'  Momlay,  induces 
nie  to  su;jposL>  lliai  tlie  inclosed  nicmorandnin  may  not  be  without 
interest  to  your  readers.  It  estal»li>h('s  tVotn  the  notes  of  Mr.  Jef- 
ferson to  tlie  Kiiglisli  and  Frcncli  ministers,  the  accordance,  before 
any  neutralty  act  was  passed  by  Congress,  of  the  principles  of  in- 
teriiutional  law,  as  maintained  in  (teiieral  Washington's  admistra- 
tion,  with  the  rules  laid  down  in  the  late  treaty  for  the  adjudica- 
tion ot  the  Alabama  claims. 

\y.  H.  Lawuexce. 
Oi  HKE  Point,  Newport,  June  1,  1871. 


]Mr.  Jefferson,  Secretary  of  Slate,  writing  to  Mr.  Hammond, 
IJritish  Minister,  under  <late  of  M;iy  l'>,  179:5,  after  ^tating  that  an 
alleged  condemnation  of  a  IJritish  prize  by  the  French  Consul  at 
Charleston  was  a  legal  nullity,  and  can  make  no  part  in  the  title 
of  a  vessel,  though  it  was  an  act  of  .lisrespect  towards  the  United 
States,  a.sserts  tltat  the  purchase  of  arms  and  military  accoutre- 
ments l)y  an  agent  of  the  Kn-nch  government,  in  tirs  country,  with 
an  intent  to  export  them   to  France,  is   permitted  by    ihe    law    of 


r.^ 


MHM 


■ 


\V 


] 


a\ 


;  !3 


!i 


nl 


I! 


84 

nntioriH.  "  It  (the  law  of  n.itiotiM)  is  HntiNfieil  with  the  external 
penalty  |noii<innfe<l  by  tJie  I'lowiilent'H  pioclainiition, — that  of 
contisoation  of  siicli  portion  of  tln'se  annn  as  shall  fall  into 
the  hands  of  any  of  the  iM'ilit'crents  on  the  way  to  tin-  ports  of 
tlieir  enemies.  To  this  penalty  onr  eili/cns  are  warne<l  that  tliey 
will  he  ahamloneil. 

"The  eapturt'  of  flu-  liritish  Hhip  (Jeorge,  liy  the  Freneh  frigate 
L' Emhuixadf,  lian,  on  iiicpiiry,  heoii  foinul  to  have  taken  phiee  with- 
in the  Hay  of  Delaware  and  Jin '-'liction  of  the  rnitcil  States.  Tlie 
government  is,  therefore  takinji  measnres  f.ir  the  liberation  of  the 
crew  ami  restitution  of  tlie  siiip  ami  ear!,'i>. 

"  It  < It'inns,  in  the  hijjfhi'st  degree,  the  conduct   of  any   of  our 

citizens  wild  may  personally  engage  in  committing  InistilitieH  at 
.«ea  against  any  of  the  nations,  parties  to  the  present  war,  and  will 
exert  all  the  means  with  whiih  the  laws  and  Con^titutinn  have 
armed  them  to  iliscover  such  as  ot!end  herein,  and  hring  them  to 
condign  punishment. 

"The  practice  of  commissioning,  ei|uippin<r  an<l  m.inning  vessels 
in  our  ports  to  cruise  on  any  of  the  heliigerent  parties  is  ei|U;illv 
and  entirely  disapprovecl  ;  and  the  government  will  take  etfectua? 
measures  to  prevent  a  repetition  of  it." 

In  a  note  from  .Mr.  Jefferson  to  Mr.  (Jenct,  Minister  of  France, 
dated  August  7,  179.%  it  is  said  :  "  I  have  it  in  charge  to  inforni 
you  that  the  President  considers  the  Tnited  States  as  hound,  pur- 
suant  to  positive  assurames  given  in  conformity  to  the  laws  of 
neutrality,  to  effectuate  the  restoration  of  or  to  make  compensation 
for  prizes,  which  shall  liave  heen  ma.ie  of  any  of  tin-  j.aities  .at  war 
with  France,  sul)se(piently  t.  the  fifth  day  of  June  last,  by  priva- 
teers fitted  out  of  our  ports. 

"That  it  is  conse.piently  e.xpeeted  that  you  will  cause  restitution 
to  be  made  of  all  prizes  taken  and  brought  into  our  ports  subse- 
<pieiit  to  the  above  mentioned  day,  by  such  privateers,  in  defeet  of 
which,  the  President  considers  it  as  incumbent  upon  the  I'nited 
States  to  indemnify  the  owners  of  those  prizes,  the  indemnification 
to  be  reinbursed  by  the  French  nation." 

In  a  note  to  Mr.  !Iammon<l,  dated  September  r»,  1703,  and  which 
was  subserpiently  annexed  to  the  treaty  of  17t»4,  Mr.  Jefferson 
says:  "  Having  for  paiticular  reasons  foreborne  to  use  all  the  meas- 
ures in  ourpoiper  for  the  restitution  of  the  three  vessels  mentioned 
in  my  letter  of  August  7,  the  President  thouglit  it  incumbent  on 


35 


the  Unitol  Stutos  to  make  (•oiiiponMrition  for  tlu'in ;  iuhI  though 
iicUliiii^  wilt  h:\u\  ill  ihrit  I«'Hor  of  other  veMseln  takoii  uinler  liku 
firciiiiiit  iiifcs.  atnl  hioii.,'ht  in  attiT  tin-  .latu  of  that  lotfcr,  iho 
Pri'si.liMit  Jfh'i'iiiiiicil  fhit  .ill  tho  iiuMiis  in  our  j.owit  shouhl  he 
Uit'.l  tor  their  ivj^tilutioii.  If  those  tail  im.  as  we  shoiiM  not  l.o 
hoiiiKl  1))'  our  troatit'M  to  make  (•oin|ieii'satioii  to  the  other  powers, 
in  the  aiiah>i,'nuN  case,  he  ili<l  not  mean  to  yive  an  opinion  that  it 
ought  to  l)e  .h>ne  to  <;reat  IJiitain.  Hut  still,  if  any  eases  shall 
arise  suhse<|iient  to  that  'lite,  the  oireiinistances  of  whieii  shall 
place  them  on  similar  ;,'roun. Is  witli  those  hefore  it,  the  Presi-U-nt 
wtJiiM  think  eompens;itioii  eipially  iiicnmhent  on  the  rnitoil 
States."     [.letr-ison's  Works,  \„\.  III.,  pp.  -J-JK,  liO.'i,  -JS;').] 

Ily  Art.  V 11,  treaty  of  ItUh  N'ovemher.  1791,  ( Jay's  treaty:) 
"It  is  agiee.l  that  in  all  sueh  eases  where  restitution  shall  not  have 
been  ma.le  au'rceaidy  to  th-  tenor  ,,f  the  letter  from  Mr.  JeUeisoii 
to  .Mr.  Ilamm  .iiI,  .laleil  ;it  I'hilailelphia,  .Septeml.cr  .'i,  IT'.i.J,  a  copy 
of  whieh  is  annexeil  to  this  treaty,  tin.  ,...inpiaiMts  of  the  parties 
shall  he,  ami  herehy  are,  ret"erre.l  to  the  eommissioners  to  he  ap- 
pointe.l  hy  virtue  of  this  artiele,  who  are  herehy  authorized  ami 
re<|uirecl  ti)  proeeeil  in  like  manner  relative  to  these  as  t.i  the  other 
cases  coinnillecl  to  iheiii."  [Uiiite.l  States  Statutes  at  Lan'e, 
Vol.  Vfll,  p.  IJI. 


-j! 


I  i 


tUll^-i 


-^mitm 


m 


^ 


ii   : 


V 


J 


'■i-^?!"-.t;"^^'?ft.-";^!Sl?i>.^i,^.-J 


ini)Iim;ct  claims. 


«>rl|llK    I'ulM,    NkWI'iiUi,   I{,  1.) 

April  'Jdtli,  I >:•_'.  j" 

Ti>  titi     I'JdItitr   iif'  thr    /'I'liriifi'tirf  Joitniill : 

Yoiir  n':i.l<T«  iijay  |M»!*j«ihly  iccollfci  ,i  letter  in  ntiMvi\cf  |..  tin- 
TriMly  uf  NV;i>i|iiiii.'ton.  ,i,|,h,.s^,.il  l..  ih,.  \\'„rf<f,  .liiriiiuc  the  |.eii- 
ik'iwy  111' til. •  .lisciissiuii  ..(  tlicMil.j.Ti  licl'ure  tlir  Sciiiitc,  :iiiii  wlii.h 
yon  (lid  nie  lln  hnimr  to  Ir.in-lcr  to  tin-  Jouhxai..  In  that  artiile 
I  I'liih-avortii  I.I  li'wf  a  Mnniiiary  of  the  treaty,  as  F  iiii(h'n*ti)o.l  it 
•  leiive.l  not  merely  IVoni  my  interi-oiirse  at  the  time  with  the  e.>ni- 
mi>>i.. tiers  ..I'liniJi  .■..iinlrit's,  an<t  fnmi  the  iiei,'<>tia(i.)ns  \\  hi.-h  ha-I 
j>recoiK'.l  it,  l.nl  ti.>m  an  attontivc  perusal  <.f  thi'  trt-aty  ilHelf.  In 
my  remarks  . Ml  that  portimi  ..t  it  which  ivlaleil  to  the  Alu/xniut 
i/in'iim,  s..  ealle.l.  I  expresse.j  niy  ;4iatiti.'ation  at  the  witlwlrawal  ..( 
all  pretensions  t..  imlemnity  fur  injuries  gr.nviiii,' .(ut  .<f  tl.epie- 
fipitatf  ie(ut,r„iiinii  ,,f  iMJlii^'iieii.  y,  pretonsions  whicli  iia.)  ever, 

diiriiii,'  Mr.  Sewar.l's  a.lministrali f  the  State  Department,  been 

an  »)l)staik'  to  all  ami.al.h'  nen;..ti:ilion  will.  tJreal  Itritain,  th..iij,'h 
tlit'v  Wfif  fvon  then  repmliate.i  in  sli(»!i|,'er  lanj,'iiai,'e  than  I  lia.l 
cvfri'mph.ye.l,  in  the  \\<  ik  pn-pateil,  at  tho  Secretary's  siij;!,rest ion 
tn  siipeihe.le  /.>nrr.„r,'M  ]V/,>,it(m.  It  is  to  hi>  remeniheie.l  in  this 
c..nmeti..ii,  that  it  was  ..n  this  reeou'nition  ami  not  speeideallv  on 
account  of  the  vio|,iti..n  of  nentra!  oliliiiations  in  allowiriiith.' etpiip- 
meiit  of .diife.lerat.' .rniscis  in  Uritish  ports,  (which  was  only  ff- 
U'rinl.il  as  oi!.-  ol  the  eonse.pienees  ..f  the  a.imissi.Mi.)  that  the  tlc- 
mnn.l  for  iixlelinite  i.  .lamalions  ha<l  I.een  ma.le  l.y  the   American 

^"•\'' •■"'■      '  ••'l>"  '^  ;il«''l  that  such  was  the  gr(.nn<l  assnme.l  hy 

-Mr.  Motley,  ami  whi.-h  imlm>e,|  a  stale  of  thinjfs  thai  would  have 
ren.leie.l  any  Inrlher  attempt  at  nenuliation  impracticable,  ha.i  not 
the  recall  of  tint  minister  satislie.I  the  yo\ crnmenl  of  ( Jreal  Brit- 
ain that  a  cliaiiye  of  policy  had  oceurretl  at    \Vashingt.)n. 


I      I 


"HWi'iiK 


-^i^T-mmmss: 


4>m 


.,:^:*ii*i::-V./ 


St 


S8 


In  my  iiiukMstanding  of  the  treaty,  wliati'vcr  injuries  tlio  Unitetl 


ate8  hiul  sustained,  otherwise  tlian  by  tlie  «lirect  Hpoiialion  of 
individual  proptrty,  in  cunsecpienfe  of  the  eseHpeoftho  Aialiima 
and  otiuT  vessels  from  IJiitisIi  ports,  was  condoned  l»y  the  expi-ss. 
ion  of  t)ie  regret  of  Iler  .Alajesty's  noveriMnenf,  wliiie  it  was 
deemed  a  j^reat  (loneession  to  the  United  States  t!iat  England 
slioiihl  allow  to  he  applied  to  the  adjudication  of  eases  that  bad 
already  occurred,  principles  of  international  law,  which  slie  lia<l 
only  prospectively  adopted.  The  more  stringent  provisions  of  tiie 
new  British  neutrality  act,  and  tin  submission  of  the  cases  coming 
under  it,  as  with  us,  to  a  court  of  admiralty,  were  alluded  to  as 
con8e(jui'nccs  of  the  discussions  gidwing  out  of  American  recla- 
mations. Indeed,  the  eminent  (Jeinian  jMiblicist  Ilolt/cndorf  con- 
siders the  adoption  of  the  rules  delining  the  obligations  of  neu- 
trality the  best  atonenient  that  could  liave  been  made  to  un  for 
national  injuries. 

My  sketch,  at\er  citing  (he  part  of  the  treaty  which  re<iuire8 
the  arbitrators  to  determine  as  to  each  vessel  separately,  whetlier 
(Jreat  Ibitain  bad  failed  to  fultill  the  duties  set  forth  by  the  pre- 
scribeil  rules  l.iid  down  in  the  treaty,  proceeds  to  say:  "What 
ought  to  commend  this  portidu  of  the  treaty  to  us  is  that  the  rules 
which  are  to  be  the  basis  of  tin;  .adjudication  are  essentially  the 
same  as  'vere  ailopted  by  <mu-  government  in  the  lVesi<lency  of 
Washington,  and  when  .letfei-"M  was  Secretary  of  State.'' 

Tliis  (piotation  suHiciently  slid ws  that  wliile  the  tre.-ity  w.as  under 
the  discussion  of  the  Senate,  mi  indirect  dam.iges  were,  in  my  jinlg- 
ment  contemplated,  .and  it  constitutes  a  sutli<-ient  answer  to  the 
statement,  which,  to  the  surprise  of  n»y  friemls,  both  at  hoiin"  ami 
abro.id,  has  appeared  in  si-veral  of  the  public  journals  that  the 
"American  case,"  in  which  tiny  arc  presentetl,  had  been  submitted 
to  my  ex.imination  anti  received  my  a|iproval.  This  announce- 
ment occasioni'd  inc  no  iiillc  emltarrassnicnt,,  as,  while  it  is  very 
certain  that  in  no  u.iyhas  my  aiii  in  any  matter,  relating  to 
the  treaty  or  olhci  wise  alVccling  om-  foreign  rehitions  been  asked 
by  the  present  administration,  the  "  case"  w.is  brought  to  my 
inHice,  as  a  matter  of  personal  conlidence,as  I  etuiciixed,  and 
under  ciicwmstaiicis  which  imposed  secrecy,  by  tlie  gentletnan  to 
whom  its  preparation  was  entrusted. 

I  had  no  right  to  take  any  exception  to  the  fact,  that  my  friendly 
suggestions  on  the  points  now  in  tjnestion    were   not    adopted,  but 


30 

It  is  no  (k'roi;atloii  to  my  sciitinionts  of  poi-sonal  regard  for  tlio 
author  of  tl.o  ,,a|„.r  or  to  tl.e  most  kindly  relations  which  I  have 
cverenteitained  towards  a!l  the  parties  who  are  responsible  for 
the  work,  that  I  am  not  willing  to  be  supposed  to  have  !ic.|niesed 
in  propositions  v.hieh  are  at  variance  with  mv  well  known  views 
o«  I-ul.lie  law,  as  well  as  with  what  I  deem  to  \h^  the  true  constrn.- 
tion  of  the  treaty, 

I  will,  in  this  connection,  add  that,  having  been  an  observer  of 
the  conciliatory  mo.le  in  which  the  negotiations  precedin^r  the 
treaty  had  been  conducted  at  Washington,  I  .Ji.l  object  a's  con 
trary  to  the  un.lerstan.bng  of  all  parties,  to  those  criminations  for 
past  ev.M.ts  whi.h  I  Rupp.^c.l  it  to  have  been  the  object  of  the 
treaty  to  terminate. 

My  own  idea  wouM  hav  been  to  have  adopte<l  the  same  course 
as    I  aOerwards  foun.l,  was   followed   in   the  preparation  of  the 
''  Knglish  case,"  an.l  to  have  presented  a  starement  contined  cxch.- 
sively    to   the  matters    properly  cgniziblo    before    the    Tribinid 
applying  to  the  facts  of  each  cas.-  the  rules  cstablish.-d  bv  the  Treaty 
for  their  a.lju.licalion.     Moreover,  I  should,  without  havin.'  antic! 
pate.l   the  recent  action  of  the  Ibitish  government,  have  deen.ed  it 
moie  consistent  with  tlu-  dijinity  of  the  countrv,  as  well    as  ,„ore 
likely  to  effect  a  favorable  result  with  the  arbitrators,   not    to  have 
'••l«li|<'<'<l  any  claims    which  I  did  not  believe  ought  to  In-  admitted 
by    them  ;   though    I   am    .p.ite   aware  that    it    has   bee„  suppos- 
ed    by    fore.g,.    publicists    that    the  Ifnite  1  States  presented    the 
indirect   demamis    rather  as  in.leterminable  elen.ents,  to  be  taken 
into  eonsi.lerat.on,  in  the  moral   appreciatio.i  of  the  facts  than  as 
the  precise  basis  of  indenn.ity.     And  such,  I   have  been    assured 
was  the  object  which  Mr.  Sumner  had  in   view    when  he  breu.d.t 
them  to  notice  in  his  celebrated  speed.  ,m.  the  .Fohnson-C'larend.u. 
treaty. 

Asit  is,  the.laimsprescnte.l  in  the  •>  American  case"  are  •  1st 
Those  tbrdiivci  losses  growing  out  of  the  destrueti.ui  of  vessels 
and  tneir  cargoes  by  the  insurgent  cruisers.  These,  which  were 
estimated  at  «14.li(M.,(l..o,  during  the  session  of  the  Commissioners 
are  stated  in  the  do.ui.ents  .annexed  to  the  "case"  at  *l!Mf>l  .p>j,' 
01._  The  second  el.ass  is  fur  national  expenditures,  in  pursuit  ".('th,. 
eruiseis,  esuni.ated  by  the  Navy  Department  at  ^T.ltsO.ITS  7() 

I  hese  latter  do  not  seem  to  have  been  the  subject  ot  special  dis 
eussion,  nor  are  they  mentioned  in  the  piote.st  against  the  indirect 


•|5   . 


J  » 


^te«*<wites: 


.  *.g.i» 


[I 


40 

cliiiins  recently  lucst'iiti'd  Ml  (u'lii'V.i.  f.oid  (ii;m villi',  liovvcvor, 
says  ill  ii  iidto  »•(■  tlie  'Jdth  or^I.iicli  IMT'J,  to  (iciicnil  Solieiiok; 
•'Nor  dill  Hit  Mnjcsty's  irovi'iniiiont  oKjofl  to  tlic  iiitrodm  lion  of 
claims  lor  tlic  e.\|K'iisi!  o(  tlu'  |iiiisnit  ot  tlit'  Al.il>;mi:i  .unl  oljici' 
vessels,  iiotwitlisimdiiiLr  tlic  ddubi,  liow  liir  tlu'sc  chiims  tli()Ui»l» 
iiieiitioin'(l  (luiii)i^  llu'  cotili'ioii'i's  asdiioct  claims,  eamo  ivitliin  (lio 
I  ro]iorsco|;c  ol  tlic  aibitralion  "  Time  is  in  the  "case"  ai^eneia! 
claim  .or  the  (lestniction  of  vessels  and  property  of  the  i^ovcin- 
iiient  of  the  I'nited  Stales,  liiit  in  looking,'  into  vol.  vii.  of  the 
"Claims  of  the  I'niled  Stales  ajjfainst  (Jreat  I'nilain,"  p.  117, 
to  which  reference  is  given  dn'  details,  no  instance  of  any 
kin<l  is  to  he  found  except  that  of  4he  revenue  <'utter  Caleb 
Cushinir,  said  to  ha\c  hem  cut  out..f  the  harhoi-  ot  I'orlland  .and 
destroyed  hy  a  tender  to  the  Florid.a,  the  value  <if  which  is  cstima- 
teil   at  *i-2.">.(l(M».  * 

The  other  claiin>  are  those  which  present  the  obstacles  to  the 
further  progress  of  the  arl»itraliirs.  'I'hey  are  "the  loss  in  the 
transfer  of  the  .\merican  eommerc-al  marine  to  the  Dritish  Mac, 
the  enhanced  payn\ents  ol  insurance,  ,  he  proloui^ation  of  the  war 
and  the  ad.lition  of  a  larLfe  sum  to  the  cost  of  the  war  and  the  sup- 

I'lessi if  the    reheliion."     TIh-si.   are    indeiin'te    in    ainounLaml 

may  well  exceed  the  whole  indemnity  paid  or  paynhle  to  (Jerniany 

hy  Fr.inee,  on  ac(  >)unt  of  the  recent  wa.  hetween  those  countries 

for  war  is  carried  (,n  heie  at  a  vastly  greater  expense  than  in  Kn- 
repe.  '{'he  "case"  says— what  we  insert  as  a  specimen  of  the 
indirect  claims — "  The  Tribunal  will  see  that  after  the  battle  of 
(letty.xbmi;  the  olfensive  operations  of  the  in>urL,'ents  were  con- 
ducted only  at  sea,  through  these  crui>.er>,  and  observing  that  the 
war  was  jirolonged  fi-r  that  purp.se,  will  be  able  to  determine 
whether  (Jreat  I'.iilain  ougit  not,  in  e<piily,  to  reimburM'  to  the 
rniled  Slati's  the  e\pi'iise>  thereby  entailed  Upon  them." 

It,  instead  of  de!i'i||ii,iii|.jr  ||n.  pen  ling  (piesii(»n,  .•iccor<liiig  to 
the  understanding  of  the  parties,  we  r.re  to  e,,nsi.|cr  the  case  .as  we 
would  a  litigateii  matter  <<\'  privati'  contract  between  inili\  iduals,  it 
is  by  the  treaty  itself  and  not  l)y  the  /'ruttinil  xlt-.a  we  are  to  be 
governed.  'I'he  ratification  rif  ihe  Senate  is  essential  to  anv  inter- 
national arrangement,  un.l  it  has,  again  and  again,  been  derided 
tl>at  a  treaty  cannot  lie  controlled  liy  a  prntucdl,  unless  the  proto- 
col, as  w.as  done  in  tin-  case  of  the  nalurali/ ili..u  convention  with 
iJavaria,  is  itsell,  in  terms,  latilied  liy  the    Staiale. 

•Tlifil.M.liii.lli.n  III    (ho  Hiir-KltaiiMT    Ualtcius  liv  llu.   Al.ii>iiiii;t,  iiHulsmil'  u  luiiiil.-  of 
baikH  luiltii  Willi  uiul,  IhuIIiiiIciI  iu  hi  lilt'    liillihli  coiinler  iuko. 


n 


TIr"  sccdiid  :ir(icl.- ,.(■  tlic  treaty  provi.lcs  tli;,l  f  li(*iirl.iirat(.rs 
"  slijill  i-\-:imiiM"  aiHl  <lrv\,h'  all  <|iicHli()iis  tlinl  shall  Im'  l.'ii<l  Iii-fure 
tliciM  oil  tlicpait  nftlu' i,'u\cnimciit  of  tlii'  irnilcil  Slates  an.liicr 
I'.iitaiiic  -Majesty  res|.ectively."  Of  cmirso,  the  (|iiestiniis  tliat  are 
tu  he  siil.initteii  are  those  referred  to  in  tiie  [.reamhle  of  th.'  1st 
article,  and  wliieh  aie  eonlined  to  ditVerenees  "  jTrowin"' out  of  t/ir 
(icfxf-miinitfcl  f>i/  f/i",  nevenil  vessels  wliieh  have -^'iven  rise  to  the 
claims  ijcencrically  known  as  the  Alal.ania  c'aiiiis,"  that  is  to  say, 
to  acts  of  tiicse  vessels  in  the  |(lun<Ier  or  cl.'sl ruction  of  |)ro|ii'rtv.* 

According,'  to  the  Hrilisli  "case,"  the  \>Uv:isi}  A/af>'nn'(  (7aiinn 
is  understood  hy  Her  Uritannic  M.ijesly'.s  i,'ovfrniiieiit  to  enihracu 
diiins  "irrowinij  out  of  acts  coinniittcd  J»y  this  vessel  and  other 
vessels,  which  are  allcL,'.  d  to  hive  hoen  pruciiri' I,  like  the  Ala- 
nia,  from  Miitish  |ioils  diiriiiL;-  the  war,  and  under  circumstances 
more  or  less  similar,  and  to  he  conliucd  to  such  claims."' 

It  is  a  received  princi|.le  of  the  Jurisprudence  coannon  (,,  Ki,.^'- 
land  and  the  Cniti'd  States,  that  d  iiun,'es  must  alwavs  he  "  tin; 
natural  and  proxlmatj  couse(|ucn('i'  of  the  act  Ci);n]>laiiu'd  of." 
Had  thislH'cn.a  controversy  hel ween  individuils,  wouM  the  idea  of 
couscijiienlial  damages    ever  su'4'.^c>ted  itself? 

Wp  have  had  since  the  coiiimencemenl  of  our  LTovi'mmeut 
numerous  cases  dd' reclamations  (111  li.'llit;erent  powers  fitr  the  vio- 
lation of  our  neutr.al  rights,  thou<j;h  I  only  can  recall  one  treat  v  in 
which  the  I'liitcd  States  were  a  party,  where  damai,'es  were  ac- 
corded l>y  a  neutral  to  a  helliu'crent.  1  refer  to  that  of  17!M,  with 
<}icat  Hritain,  where  the  cl aims  on  us  were  an  doijfous  to  those 
which  we  now  make  ..ri  Kui;land.  IJiit  neither  on  that  occasion, 
n<u- in  the  iniletfinity  treaties  with  France  and  the  States  allied 
with  her  durini;  ihcrei.n  of  the  first  Napoleon,  althoiiiih  most 
iiU(|uestional.ly  the  efFccts  of  tlu'  llnlio  .and  ,^Iilan  decrees,  in 
connecti.ii  with  tlie  IJritish  orders  in  council,  could  in  no  di'Lcree 
he  measuied  hy  tlie  actn.al  rapture  and  destruction  ()f  the  vessels 
and  car<;o"s  of  our  merchants,  w.is  the  suui^estion  ever  m.ide, 
that  indemnity  shiMild  ^o  h.-voiid  ompeiivaliou  for  the  v;due  of 
ihe    properly   taken  or  destroyed. 


i  n 


una,  iiRuU.1  111'  Ji   r,m|ilf  of 


•rill-  ••xpn^.-ioii  ill  ilic  MM  siiiiiM.o  .:(  Iho  pnaiiihlo  Wi.iil.l,  II  tiicio  wm  miy 
tliinutMinlv.Hiil  ill  Iho  |.r.,..liiin  luMtJraiili,  slii.«!.  Iliut  llic  truaty  w:i»  iiitoii.lcl  In  npjily 
"Illy  III  ilircrt  lifts  .,r  tlicxi  \oiis.l'..  Th,.  wor.ln  iir.>,  ■•  Wluaoas  Hit  ISritaiiiili-  M.iji'siy 
liaMiiilli.iriz.'.l  liiT  lliirli  <,',.iiiiiiiH»i,,in.r!i  ami  I'l.'iil|.  )t.Mi»laiir»  ti.r\pivs<  in  alil.Mi.lly 
M'lot,  tl.e  r.-uril  I,  ll  l,y  ll.r  .M  .j.  HlyV  ti,i\,inimnl  t.ir  llie  eg-'ape  iiilIit  «l,al«ver 
rlr.MiiiHlaiirfi.,  ,il'  ihf  .\latiama  uii.l  iilliei-  v.•■.H.■l^  lidiii  ISritiali  IVrls  ami /.)■  Mr  ./r/ire- 
dalioni  ci'iiiiiiiltiil  l^y  tlmw  visu'ls  :  nun  in  nr.lcr,"  Ac. 


'•rmi^i 


■*Ss> 


-mmmmc:::::^^.. 


R-«E£iMiHNH 


■smmmm 


I 


I 


K 


42 

Tt  nmy  1*  woll  t(i  rociill  to  mind  tlint  ll,o  indirect  d;irnnge« 
dniiiu'd  l)y  our  "  (•:is(.,"  jis  ^^rrowint,'  ..iit  of  tlie  nets  roimnittcd  by 
tlic  Alahaina  .-md  oflicr  oniiscis,  mo  jnocisoly  of  tlii"  same  cliarar- 
tcr,  it'iiot  idiMilical  with  those  put  forward 'dining  the  whole  of 
Mr.  Seward's  ailmiiiist  ration  of  the  State  Departinnit,  as  a  eonse- 
qiienceofthe  premature  reeo^rnilion  of  Confederate  l.ellit,'erenev, 
«  ground  of  complaint  which,  thou-ii  u>\v  reproduced  in'the  hill' 
of  in.\ictment  against  Great  Britain,  was  suppose!  to  have  been 
abandoned  l)efore  the  negotiations  of  the  recent  High  Commission 
were  comtnenced. 

The  only  light,  wliich  ca.i  be  derived  frf)m  the  terms  of  the  treaty 
itself,  as  to  tlic  nature  of  the  damages  to  which  the  ITnite.l  States 
may  be  entitled,  is  from  the  provision  in  tlic  7tli  article  which 
r(?(inires  that  the  tribunaUhall//v7  .letermine  as  to  each  vessel 
"whether  Great  Britain  has  by  any  act  or  omission  faile.l  to 
fulfill  any  of  the  duties  set  fcu'th  in  the  foregoing  throe  rules 
or  rocognizo.l  by  th<>  principles  ,.f  international  law  not  incon- 
Nistent  with  such  rules,  and  shall  certify  such  facts  as  to  eac/i  of 
the  naid  vessels.'''' 

As  in  each  case  determined  against  <;roat  Britain,  the  Bo-.r.l  of 
Assessors  are,  by  the   10th  article,  to  ascertain   and  determine  the 
amount  which  shall  b.-paid  by  (J.eat  Britaii,  to  the  irnitcl  States  on 
account  of  the  liof>ilif,/ '.xvUU,cr  from  surh  f.ijuie  as  to  v.wh  vcsmoI 
according  to  the  extent  of  such  lial.-lity  as  decided  bv  the  arbitra' 
tors,  there  wouM  seem    to   be   n(,  room   for    in.lirect'  or    nation  ,1 
damages.      B.^sidos   the  ditlicuUy  of  deciding  on   a  .lain,    indetor 
minable  in  its  n.'.turo,  there  would  be  the  further  endnrrassment  of 
apportioning  the  amount  ofinjury  growing  out  of  the  a,-ts  of  each 
vessel  m  the  general  acco.mt.     Is  it  possible   that  the  assessors  are 
to  decide  wh.at  part  of  ihe  prolong.ation  of  the  war  is  to    !„■  assi-r,, 
ed  to  e.ich  vessel  V     Are  they  to  apportion  to  them  re.sp.M-livd y  The 
u.nom.t  of  |o>,<cs,in  the  transf.-r of  American  shipping  to  the  British 
Hag  and  for  enhanced  insuran.-c  to  which  th.-v  mav  be  suppose.l  to 
have,.,.ntrd.utcdy      If  only  one   case  is   sent    to  the   .as.sessors   the 
rest  bemg  found  for  (Jreat  Britain,  are  all  the    indirect  dam  ,.^'s  ,o 
go  with   it?  '"'  ' 

I    an.    aware   that    there   is    a    provision    th.at     the    arbitrators 
may,  alter  they  have  .lecided  .as  to  e.a.-h    vessel   sep.aial.dy    aw  ir.l 
a    sun.   .n   gross      -r  all  the   dainn  referred   ,„   ,i,,,„       ,    ,^„„;,,^ 
however    percen.      how    that    stipulation,  which  applies   me.ely  t«'. 


10  iiidiroct  (l;irnngeii 
nets  coinniittcd  by 

of"  tin-  saiiio  cliarac- 
linintj  tho  wliole  of 
(iirtinont,  as  a  oonso- 
'Iciatc  ItcIliufcMciicy, 
M-oiliiced  in  tlu-  hill 
iwHoi  to  havo  hocn 
It  Misjcli  Commission 

s'tcnnsof  tlip  treaty 

I  the  ITnitcd   States 

"til    artido   which 

as  to  each    vessel, 

omission   failed  to 

'goinj,'  three   rules, 

iial  law   not  incon- 

facts  as   to  eac/i  of 

i-itain,  the  Roard  of 
and  determine  the 
lie  linited  States  on 
'  as  to  each  vessel, 
le<l  hy  the  ailiitra- 
diiect   or   national 

11  a  claim  indeter- 
r  embarrassment  of 
of  the  acts  of  each 
;il  the  assessors  are 
ar  IS  fi(  be  assiijn- 
•m  respect ivcly  the 
'|»iiii,'to  the  Hrilish 
lay  be  supposed  to 

'  the   assessDi's,  the 
I  direct  damiges  to 

It  the  arbitrators 
separately,  .award 
them.  I  cannot, 
applies  merely  to 


43 

can,  in  anywise,  extend  tlie  scope  of  tho 

icrwise  cojini- 


the  mode  of  settlement, 

power  of  the  tribunal  so  as  to  include  claims  not  oti 


sable  before  it.     If  we  were  perinitte<l  to  look  out  of  the  treaty  for 


Its  meaning,  we  should  find  tfiat  the  award  of 


!i  gross  sum  was  the 


plan  originally  proposed  by  the  American   I'letiipotentiaries,  when 


ofle 


•ing  t( 


<>  conline  our  claims  to  the  direct  damages,  iind  the  in- 
ference would  be  that,  when  used  elsewhere,  the  term  was  to 
have  the  same  s<-ope  and  no  (Uher  than  when  originally  suggested. 
.  Such  a  mode  of  sett'ement  would  in  any  event  be  a  desirable  ar- 
r.angement.  In  ease  of  a  decision  in  ourtiivor  in  respect  to  am  por- 
tion of  our  claims,  it  wouhl  termin.ite  the  responsibility  of 
Kngland,  and  leave  the  distribution  to  be  made,  as  has  been  flic 
casein  most  ot  our  treaties  for  indemnity,  by  the  United  States 
among  their  own  citizens. 

The  cl.aim  of  the  United  States  for  indirect  d.images  has  been 
attempted  to  be  dediu-e<l  froni  the  statements  in  the  protocol,  i\» 
c<mnectcd  with  the  articles  of  the  treaty,  in  relation  to  the  Alabam.i 
claims.  We  have  already  shown  that  whatever  might  be  the  rule 
in  Countries  where  the  treaty  making  power  w:is  wholly  vested  in 
the  executive,  with  us  a  protocol  not  ratified  l)y  the  Senate,  c.uld 
not  vary  the  nblig.ilioi;:*  of  a  treaty  any  more  than  the  cor- 
respondence preceding  a  private  contract  could  afVeet  its 
meaning;  and  it  is  .piite  obvious  that  in  this  case  the  cone! u- 
sions  having  been  arrived  at  by  the  final  arr.iiigement  of  the 
terms  of  the  treaty,  comparatively  little  imporf.ince  might  have 
been  attached  by  the  plenipotentiaries  to  a  paper  which  was  a  mere 
liistory  of  the  transaction  aii<l  which  did  not  even  be.ar  their  signa- 
tures. 

It  is  i)y  the  following  phrase  of  this  protocol  that  our  pre- 
tensions to  picse.it  the  cl.iims,  which  are  here  cited  from  the 
"case,"  .are  deemed  to  have  been  r»serveil.  AfU>r  enumerating 
our  grievances,  it  is  said  :  "In  the  hope  of  an  (trnirablr  KittUtnent, 
no  estimate  was  ma  le  of  the  indirect  losses,  without  prejudice, 
however,  to  the  right  to  in  lemuilieation  (ui  their  account  in  the 
event  of  no  .inch  .ttff/i  >iu  ii(."* 

il.ciitUniwii     [.  Willi  i!„  ,,,i„o  t,.iiii„lilie»  «.s  ii   •■n.inriiiii.ii."  or   •■  tfaiy"  mi.l  „i,il,.„il. 

IK.rl!,  t,.  1.0  i„..u'l>  a  ;.■■...■,,,•,, 7.1/  ,.(  il„.   ,„„ii,,,  .li„,i»w,|   „t  tli,.  filling,.    iIiuml-Ii     ,,i 
.irawu  „,.  I,.  ,„„«>  i.Mh.y.     llH.I  it  1,0,.,,.  tl„..,.  «„„l,|,  |„„l,„l,h,  hiu-llJulu'^Z^^^^^^^ 

u,r,'  Zoiu,'  ^ ,":' '"','  'r\"  ''"■'-•  •■•..''^•'•;-"""  '""I""--  "  >«iHH  ;!.i/s,;,,»r,;  ;*,r 

„fi    ..     r?       .  '•<-<i,.,a,i,.H  „(  ,|„.  |.:„t;li,l,  uM.l    Ai„r,l,u„   f..i,„„lH,Hl„„  aii.l  ii.,t  tlu.se 


ii 


■''^•"s'^^tMMSsr: 


•'* 


:.*J*Bf 


MJ 


ilMMMaawMMi 


?*■ 


* 


V 


ijili  il 


44 

Sii|i|K»i:inr  clU'cl  to  1m>  <;ivt'ii  to  tlif  |in>titc(il,    \vli;il  is  (lio   lliCMH- 

ill!,'  nt'(^////<v^//A    srfffoitCIlt/       It  Sl'OlllS  ti»  US  lll.ll    tin-    t  I'lIC  cidist  I'llO- 

tinii  ot'  ilic  term  is  to  (Icoin  if  ns  opixiscij  In  w.ir,  or  n-prisals, 
oi',  ill  L;tMicr.ii  l.inuii.'iLr*'.  to  "  uiiriiciiiliy  acts."  Now  an  atfrcciiK'iit 
to  icti'i'  to  imiliial  friends  is  ccitainlv  not  .-in  nnlVicii'lly  act.  Tlu' 
)irinci|ilc  is  llic  simic  wlictlicr  a  siiiii  is  oircrcil  ;iiii'.  acci'iitcd  in 
sati.s('a<li(>h  oC  a  claim,  or,  ('s]ii'cially  in  a  •  asc  wlicic  a  party 
is  under  no  oliliiritioii  to  siilmiit  liis  cuise  to  any  fUnmi,  reter- 
ciice  is  voluntarily  made  to  arliitrators  to  deteiiiiine  tlie  amount, 
it'any.  wliicli  is  to  1-  ■'  -"  account  ot'an  existiuL;  <lilVerciice.  If* 
tlic  conferences  li.id  i  lv"n  otV,  witliout  tlie  conclusion  ofativ 

convention,  that  is  l(;  y,  willidut  an  unn'cdfi/e  suffknieitt,  llio 
riLrlits  of  tlie  |).ii'lies  would  have  liei'ii  as  tliey  were  liefue  tlio 
coiuiueii'tiueiit  of  neijotialions,  luillier  lia\iiiif  cmio'ded  anvtliin". 
I  (Miiiiot,  ii((we\er,  iielieve  lliat  after  we  liad  accepted  from  Ku'^- 
lainl  an  apology  tor  tlieesrape  of  tlie  ( 'oiifedcrate  cruisers,  induced 
lier  to  recoL;iii/.e  new  rules  of  marilime  law,  lo  waive  all  demands 
for  llie  Feniaii  invasiiuis  of  Canada,  and  to  make,  witli  mutual 
assent,  \:irious  pro\  isioiis  ;is  to  ilir  otlier  matters  in  tlie  ficatv,  wo 
liave  a  rijilit  to  reopen  any  Ljfounds  of  complaint  wliicli  pioless- 
cdly   would  liave  lieen  concluded  Iiy  an  nhiicufifc  xtttli mint. 

The  note  aecompanyinL,'  the  Uiitish  couiiter-casi'  delivered  on 
the  I'lth  ill-taut  to  the  IJoard  of  Arliitrators  -t  ( ;eiir\:i,  slates  that 
;i  misim  ler-'andiiiL;  hasunlorliiintely  arisen  Itetween  (Jrt'at  Uritain 
!ind  the  United  States,  as  to  the  nature  and  extent  of  the  claims 
ref'.M'red  to  the  'rriluinal  l>y  the  1st  article  o|  the  Treaty  of  Wash- 
iiiLitoii.  'fills  misiiiider>laiidiiiLC  relale>,  it  i^  said,  to  claims  for 
indirect  losses  under  the  several  heads  ot' 

'•1st.  The  losses  in  the  transfer  of  the  .\merican  commercial 
nvirine  I  .  the  IJriiish  llaj^:  'Jd.  The  enh  nice  I  insurance;  .'M.  The 
lirolon.r:ition  of  i!  e  war  an  I  th  ■  alliiion  of  a  lartre  sum  to  thi> 
cost  of  the  war  an  I  the  suppression  of  the  relielliou,  which  cluims 
for  indirect  losses  are  not  admillei!  lo  I.e  within  the  scope  or  the 
inleiilioii  o|  the  h  fereiice  to   arbit latioii," 

\\\\v\\  the  r.ritish  protest  was  delivered,  .Mr.  ll.iicrotl  Divis,  the 
au'eiil  on  the  part  of  the  rnited  Slates,  .adijresseii  a  note  to 
tlie  aihitraiors,  siatiii^r  that  '•  hi.«j  instructions  not  lia\  iiii,' contem- 
plated tli(*  prohaliility  of  sucli  :i  coiiise  on  the  part  of  Her  .Majes- 
ty's >,'overnmenl,  lie  reserve!  to  his  t^'overmiicnt  its  full  rii^ht  liere- 
■atler  to  \  indicate  1  c fore  the  Trilniiial  the  .•luthorily,  which  it  mi- 
der.staiids  the  Tiiliiiiial  ac.piired  under  the  treaty  in  this  respccl." 


■T;  *tf<^ttti>itn.if,  «m'iyn'*-~-^-tmi>.^fpiti.f^  -  ^^ 


45 


It 


wouM  siM-m  tliut,  within  a  few  days.  ilu.  point  in  (li^piue 


rod'it'nci'  to  th 


in 


•'  mcaiiing  ot'tht.'  treaty  lias  occnpied  the  atttMiliuii 
of  ConLfivss.  and  that  it  lias  bc-n  sn^f.^'osted  that  the  I'nitcd  States 
8h()uid  withdraw  tlu'ir  claim  tor  indirect  dainai,'es.  While  it  is 
nniversally  cnccdcd  that  no  one  has  ever  had  "the  most  renioto 
idea  that  any  award  will  he  made  on  their  account,  it  has  been, 
as  we  conceive,  very  absurdly  contended  that  liaviiis,^  pnt  forward' 
a  claim,  however  prepu^icroMs  we  oinselves  may  deem  it,  our 
di!,'iiiiy  re.|uires  that  ilshdiild  be  pa^^,.,!  nn  by  the  arbitrators. 

To  extricate  ourselves  from  the  dilemma  in  which  we  are  now 
placed,  it  has  been  suu'u'e-t -d  ihut  t|,e  iJritish  yovernmenf   sh,,uld 
albnv  the  claim  to  go  forward,  with  a  pledge  on  our  part  that  our 
arbitrator   woul-l  cneiir  in   a   decision     rejecting   it;  and  it    has 
been     alleged,    in    support  of    thi>   view,  that   a  similar    course 
hul    been    pur-ued    by    the  Commissioners    sitting    at    U'a>hiiii.'- 
ton,  in  relation  to   the  Confederate  loan.     Hut   it  is   said   that  i'l 
the   case    of  the  Washington   Commissioners,  the  parties  owning 
the    claims    were     individiials ;    while    in    the     present     case    the 
government    of   the    I'uitcd    States    i.   a    direct  party.     For  our 
own   part.    believiiiLr  that  the     claim    t"or  indirect   daina.ges     was 
unwisely  pres?iite  1  in  the  first   instance,  we  cannot  but  think  that 
...  ■  nn!,'n  minioas  policy  for  the  ruited   States  to  adopt  would  bo 
frankly  to  -My  ^,,.      We  cannot  but   believe  that  such  a  declaratiim 
would  be  pre!-. ruble,  in  every  point  of  view,  to  bringing  the  matter 
f>rm:illy   bef.e,.   ,i,i.    jl  ,:,rd,    with   lli.'    understanding  beforehand 
that    it  xhfild    be   unanimously   rejected,  even  if,  since   the  recent 
action  ot  the    IJritish   government,    such  a  course  should   now  be 
open  to  us.     The  dispute  practically  would  seem  to  have  resolved 
itselt  into  a    mere   .piestion  of  eti.piettc.     The   I'nited   States   do 
not  make  the  demand    with    the   expectation  of  getting'  anvthin-', 
ami  all  that  England  insists  ,,„   is  tl,;ii  this    little   ceremony  of  re- 
jecting the  claims  tormally  may  not   be  '_'..ne  thron«;h. 

An  abrupt  termination  ofthe  (ieiieva  Arbitration  is  to  be  ilepre- 
cated,  not  merely  on  account  ot  the  several  other  matters  in- 
volved  in  the  treatv,  which  was  adopted  as  a  whole,  but  the  tailnre 
of  the  tribunal  f  .r  the  Alabun  i  claim-  would  go  nigh  to  destroy 
all  ihose  t'ond  hopes,  which  philaul  lu-opi-ts  have  entertained,  of 
sulistituting  inteniational  arbitr.ation   lor  war. 

Whatever  may  happen  with  regard  to  the  Alabama  arbitration,  or 
iis  to  the  etitire  Treaty  of  Washiuglon,  the  historv  ol  our  diploma- 
(3 


\i 


46 

tic  relations  witli  Kntjlah  I  cmloMfiis  n-*  to  s.-iy  llia'„  no  rntisp- 
qiionct  s,  scrionsly  all'i'dinu  tlif  inatiTi.il  iiiti'icsts  i>\  citlicr  coiiMtry, 
niv  liki'ly  to  cnsiic  iVoni  it. 

Tlic  tlirt,  as  far  as  our  iiivcstiijalions  liiivi- cxti'ii'lcil,  ilocs  not 
pooni  to  lia\<'  Ix'i'M  ailvcrlt'il  to,  tlial  tlic  prcscnl  is  not  llic  dnly 
arbitration  tiiat  lias  lu-cn  snbmillcil  to  a  sovcn-iifn  |>o\vi'r  Cor  tlio 
scttliinicnt  olMifU'rcnci's  liotwccn  tlic  I'niti'il  States  Mini  Kii^lainl. 
In  tliL'  two  wiiii'ii  prcccilc'l  tln'  Treaty  ot  Wasliiii^luii,  tliouiili 
nwanls  were  in  hotli  iii>laiiccs  maijc,  iifiliicr  ol'tliciii  was  carrlcil 
into  oxocution.  It  so  liapin'iieil  that  liotli  ot"  tlie  t'oriiit'r  cason 
wore,  to  a  greater  or  less  evteiit,  inaltcrs  of  iliseiissioii  iliirin<x  my 
own  eomieelion  willi  tlie  leLfition  in  Loniloti,  ami  tlie  facts  aro, 
llierefore,  (leeply  iiii|ir(>stil  on  my  nieinoiy. 

The  orii^in  ot' tlie  first  ease  ijcoes  l»aek  to  tin?  sti|nilitioii  in  tlio 
Treaty  of  (ilieiil  of  l^I  I,  tliat  the  ••  |>laees  taken  "IniiiiiX  the  war 
w(Mc>  to  he  restoieil  without  earryint;  oil'  any  slaves  or  other  jiro- 
|ieity."  DitVerenees  ha\inij;  arisi-ii  as  to  tlie  esleiit  of  this  provis- 
ion respecting;  slaves,  it  was  aj^reeil,  hy  the  treaty  of  181^,  to  refer 
them  to  the  arhitrainent  of  a  frienilly  sovereii;n.  In  IX'J'J,  an 
award  was  niaile  hy  the  Emperor  of  Uussia,  ami  Commissioiu'rs 
on  lioih  sides  were  appointed  who  met  at  Washington,  to  carry 
tht>  award  into  cU'eit,  Init  di-a'jfieeiiiLT  as  they  did  from  the  hegin- 
ninga.s  to  till' meaning  of  the  award,  no  |>rogress  had  iieeii  matlo 
in  the  settlement  o(  the  hiisiness,  when  Mr.  (Jallatin  wont  to 
London  in  Is-JlJ.  At  .in  early  confereni'e  with  Mr.  ('aiming,  the 
latter,  seeing  that  the  discussion  waslikidy  to  he  intermiu.alile,  pro- 
posed a  compromise,  providing  the  I'liited  St.ites  would  accept  n 
rcasoii.ihli'  >-uiii  enblnc,uuA  ;in  .irnuigemcnt  to  that  etlect  was  ac- 
complished hy  a  convi'iilion,  which  abrogated  the  treaty  .«f  St. 
I'etersburg  .and  gave  to  the  I'liitiMl  States  sl.-jd  |,!m;|,  J  happen 
toh.ive  heiore  nil'  the  statement  of  the  sctilcmcnt,  showiiiii  tli.'it 
ihel'iiiled  States  received  the  full  ariioiitit  of  their  c|:iinis,  abating 
one-half  of  the  interest. 

To  a  similar  arrangement  of  tlie  pending  dispute,  we  have  heard 
no  objection  made,  except  that  (Jreat  Ibitiin  ileiiics  that  there 
is  any  el.iini  against  her,  and  tire-  \\  a^  also  the  ilecl.irod  re.i-on 
why  till'  En',dish  commissi. mer-.  refused  during  the  negotiation-,  to 
entertain  the  suggestion  of  a  gross  sum.  She  has,  however,  to  sav 
nothing  of  the  indirect  claims,  assented  to  a  reference,  which 
admits  the  existence  of  claims  mi  the  part  ot'the  I'liitcil  States  and 
which    mtiy   le;id  to   the    award  of  large  damages.     .\ss'-,redly  il 


11 


47 

I  .rly  \.y  ).:iyiiii.'  iuoik  y  to  luiv  liis  peace    ari-l  jiveil  tin-   .l.-m.'rr  ..f 


lu'liii;  calliMl  oil   lor  hiiii:'!' 


sums,  .Iocs  not  aliiiit   tijc  valiilitvof 


Haim  au'aiiist  liini.  In  the  iiistiuctions  to  tl.p  iJiiti^l,  ConiiniH- 
sioners  lai.l  l.i'foi.'  I'ailiamciit.  it  is  sai.l  Mnt.  "alilio,i-li  H.r  Ma- 
Jenty'H(;(.v..rniiiri,t  me  .>f  npinim,  (|,:,|  ai l.il laij,.,,  is  tlic  most  at.- 
ITopriate  mo.],,  of  s^tilemeiil,  yoii  arc  at  lilu-rly  to  tr.iiismit  for 
their  eoi.si  I,. ration  any  other  |.ro|.osal  which  may  lie  stiu'„'cste.|  for 
<U'lorminin,' .Mel  elosin,'  ihe  .|Uestioii  of  these  elaims."""lt  wmhl 
8i'cm  as  the  only  oth.T  m.  I  •  \\\.~\s  i  ,  ..een-,  Hut  tie.  IMti.sh  gov- 
orameiit  hi  I  in  view  th"  |tayiiie'::i   of  a  '^ro-is  sini. 

It  JVoiihl  appear,  as  w<-ll    tVom  the   eireiunstaiiees    atteieliiii,'  the 

iiorthern     l.oiiii.lary     en„iroversv.    as    fnmi    the    slave    iieleinnily 

c.mi.Mition,  that  lli«  prartie.l   elfe.t  of   arl.ilralion.  a>    I.efueeii  us 

•ami  Kii^lan.l,  is  only  toprepaiv  matteis  for  .lireet  settlement.   Hav- 

iiii,'  ha.i  eohti.le.j  to  me,  as  the  rep.esentative  of  the    rnile.]  St,ale> 

in  I-oii.|on,  the  sehetinii  nf  ,an  arhitrator  to   whom    t|,e    1 „,l..|,.v 

.litlioiilly  sIk.uI.I  be    relerre.l,  aiel    uliieh    resultr.J.    i .e.pi.aiee 

of  the  evjness  iiisti  netioiis  of  my  LTovernnient.  in  the  <-hoiee  of  the 
Kiii.L;  of  the  Neiheiiaiels,  I  w.is  iiejuer.l  to   ex  inline    elos-ly  every 
Miil)se(|iieiit  p''oeee.ii„ir  eoniireteil  will,    t),,.    matter.      It  will  her.". 
(•o||...'te.l  that  our  mini-lerat  tim    il.i^Mie  prot.M.M],  without  aw.iit- 
iiii;  tli»>  or.l.Ms  of  iiis    Lcoveriim.'iit.  a-:.iin>t    the    aw.inl,  p|  u-iiii,'    his 
oliJ.M'tions  ..11  tlie  faet   that    the    Kh.is.    iiiste.a.l  of  .leehlim,'  whieh 
weiv  th.'  '•  hi-hlan.ls"  ..fil,..  tiv.ity,  h.a.l    pn.pose.l  a    eonvention.il 
lin.'.      I,..r.i  I'aiim'rst.mimme.liately  iiiMriiele  I  the    IJiiti-h  Minis- 
ter  .If  Washin-ton   (Kel.riiary    !>,  ISIU )  to  s.ay  th  n    -His    .M.-.i..sty 
ha. I  II. .t  Insitate.l  to  a<-.,ui.M.e  i„  tin-  .leeisj,,,,  in  fiillillmeiit  of   the 
ol.li-.ili..ns  whieh  Ills  .Maj..sty,'oii>i,|,.r>  himself  to  have  e..iitraete.i 
hy  the  terms  of  tlie  C'.mventi.tii  of  .\il»iti.itiun  .if  ih."  'Jiith  ot  Sep. 
temher.  |s-J7.      Mis   M;ijesty  is    persiia.le.]  th.it    >n.'h     will    l,e    the 
rnm-r  .1.1. .pi.  . I  l.y  the    i;..venim.iit  ..f   the  Tnile.l  States."      Thai 
II  w.is  miwoMliN  .,f ;,  mv:it  iiati..n  t..  iv-urt  to  th.'  t.'elmi.-aiit v  .if  .an 
.i.Mit.' ;itt..riuy,  in  or,!,  r  io:i\(,i,l  !,n\  iie,r  ,.tr,.et  to  ;i  s,,vi.rei-_Mi  awanl 
whi.li    it  h.nT    s..lieil..!,  I  w  ■>    .a>M!ie.|    some    years    .atteru  :ir.|s  l.y 
<;..v.  rn..r  Tazewill,  ,at  the  time   Chairman  of  the  Senate   ('..nimit- 

' f  I-'oivi.jli   h'elatioii,,  «,,>    th.'    .!.M'hir:iti..n  ..f    th.^tiieii     IVesi- 

<hait,  tJ.aieral  .Iaeks..n,  whin  th.'   .h'ti-ior,  w.is   liist    .aiiie.uiie,-,|  t.. 

'"'"•      '"  < se.pieii.'e.  how.  ver,  of  the  r.'moiish  an.-e  of  llie  \a'^/i^. 

latnie  ..f  Miiiie,  he  was    iie|iiee,|     t,,    suliii.il   th.'     .piestioii     to    t!ie 

^'■"='''''    !' iiip.mi.'.l     with    the    .l..'i:irati.'n    of  his   earn,  st    wisj, 

that  th.'  awar.l  mi-ht  he    ass.  iiU"l    t...     The  a-hi.'e    of  that  Ko.Jv 


Jl 


.*i*3t.. 


ti'riar": 


n 


kHMMHaan 


<^ 


il! 


I! 


48 

ngninst  accepting  tlie  award  wont  on  tlio  ground  that  tlio  King  had 
not  decided  the  (piestion  iKfuic  him.  Knuland  finally  assented  to  onr 
course,  and  il  \va«  only  l>y  a  direct  negi.tialion,  as  in  the  otlier  case 
that,  in  1^42,  our  Northeastern  boundary  line  was  stttled. 

It  is  proper  to  state  that,  tiiongh  long  familiar  witli  the  (.rigi- 
iial  American  and  Kiiulisii   "  castw,"  the   preci'dini,r  ,vm  irks  have 
hi'fU  nride  in  entirr  i-iioramv  ,.(' what  the  American  counter  case 
may  contain,  an  1  with    no  ..ther  knowlodge  of  the  Kuu'lish  than 
has  been  ilerived  from  tlie  newspimers  <.f  the  day,     Krom   them, 
however,  we  learn  that   tlir  "  <'uunter-eaM'"  lu'gms  by  aunnuiici„J 
that,  to   the   American   imputations  of  hostiji.  motives  and  insin" 
cere  neutrality,  no    reply  will  be  otlered,  that   England  refuses  to 
enter  info  a  discussion  ..f  those  insinuations,  In-causf  it   would  be 
inconsistent    with    her    self-respect,  irrelevant    to   the  main  issue, 
and  would  tend  tn  inllame    ll.c  controversy,  that  no  relcrcnce  will 
be  made   to  indirect  damages.     It  is  insisted  that    the  onlv  losses 
wliich  the  arbitrators  may  in  any  event  take  into  account,  are  those 
arising  from  thecapturc  or  dcstructimi  of  ships  or  pn.p,. it  v.     'I'his 
paper,  as  well  as  the  (uiginal  "case,"  is  said  to  be  the   production 
of  Lord  ChancelliM'  Ilatlu  rh  .  ' 
. '       ,_ __  W.  li.  LAWK'KNrE. 

•  We  Imve,  binre  the  oriijliial  iml.li.atlnii  „f  tlil»  letter,  «i'oii  the  text  u(  l.,>Vli  tli.    AiiTTrTl 
cnn  HtM  Kiik'Hsli  •■.■ounterM.M.s."     n  iiiav  1...  |.ru|„.r,  i.h  l..arii,K'  on  li.e  miI.j.m  nf  il.i,  |„i. 
tor,  t,i  Kivtf  th.>  .•Mn,liis|..i.  ..Itlio  Ani.'h.-,.ii,,ipjr.   AKur  roDrin,'  f.  ilio  cUlm  „r  it  W.Uit. 
rent  to  W-  Itulfnjnilio.l  l„r  1,.»h,.s  ,Kr«»Mnt-l  l,y  tlu.  nfKllt;,.|i.o  ,.|  „  neiitrul  Knv,.n,inent    It 
tl.u!.  i.r.Kee.j.  :-•••),.,*«<.,, ,rwl.l,l,  mi.1.  .KKllk-nioi.  1^  ili,.  ,lir,..  t  .Uhl  |.r..xlu.«(f  c«uh,.  um.l 

Il  l»  in  reni'O' !  - .  .^n.  Ii  ..nly  ilw.l  .•.,ii,i,..M..iilon  iMJiiMly  Ixj  (.wnnlwl,   nre  cuinin.ml'v  i.gt 

easy  to  sei«inilf  Imm  tli<><<0  »i.rliigiiii.'  tromcfluT  ciiuh's.' 

'•  Tlie  l-hiliKl  Sl.it.-,  ouu'ur  will,  llor  M>M.'My',  Uiveriiuietil  in  tlio  <,|,iniMn  lli.l  •  a  -IhIm, 
on  til.'  pnrt  nf ,,  MllgenMit  to  N-  in.leim.ille.l  iit  tlie  evpenw.  ol ,,  ne'itril  i„r  |.„m.»  |,  ,il,-e.l 

<"■  "^■""' ■''  '■>■  »">  "'  "'"  "rillniiry  ..|«'rnlion»  oC  war '  ■  in  .me  wliU-l,  Involve-  n.ave  .-..n- 

si.len.ll..n,,  an.|  re.|Mi.ei.  t,.  I*  «el>:l».|  with  the  iitiiio»i  .,.ie.'  Wlthoi,-  the  r\,.lui„ii„r» 
nb^rvHll.,,,,  wl,i.  h  her  Mi^ieMy.  (^,^ernnM•n.  ren^rve,  the  ri«ht  t„  m„ke  in  a  l,.l«r  -.«« 
01  the  pr.Hee,lli,«».  tli.y  ean..„t  nay  h.,„  far  they  ,lo  „r  .|„  not  .M.n.nr  In  the  fuiiher  Mat.- 
nienl  that  ,-.mi|K.iiMti.,n  ,•«»  only  j,i»ily  !„•  awar.le.l  l,y  the  'Irll.niial  in  te.pe,-t  (,,  l,.».e»  ot 
whirl,  the  iiet;ll«en,'e  ,.l  the  neutral  in  (he  .lire,  t  an,t  pruimate  .aiiw. 

••Itai.|H<arMo  then,,  howerer.    thai    certain  Keneral  eo„^i.lerations  n,  ,v  rea.,..nnl.lv  ho 
W«ll..e,li.ylhe»rMtral,.r,.     1.  »oth  partle- .N.niemi.late  that  the  fniiel  Htat.ii  will    en- 
(leavorto..,lah:i,hiiitl,e..e|.r,«<H-.linj{,   H,.,ne   tanxih!  •  c,.i,n«.|i„n  of ,.,»«,■  a,,,!  elt.vl  Ik.. 
tween  the  ln.lnrl«  t„r  whleh  ilu-y  a,k  .•..i,„,enHalioii  aiel  tl,«  'ncU  .•..,iin,itt...l  hv   the  «eve 
r«l  ve,»,.|.  •  «hl,l.  thu  Treaty  e,.nten,,,lale..  are  t„  he  »h„»n  t.,  he  the  |,„Mit  ol'lh  .,c  i.ij., 
rie,.    ..  il"Irih,..ml..fArhitra.i.ml.eln«nj,„lh.:alb^ly,lnve.tc,ll,vthepar,i„,„i„.,I., 
lu.i.tions  ne....^ary  f„r  .IrlerininlnB  H.e  iM.ie.  I«.|»veen  then.,  an.l  Mrx  i,.,w  .eire,|  of  th« 
Bub.taneeortl,ematterHln.li.,.uie,  «illholJltHelllH,„n,l  hv  ».|.  h  r.-a^.iml.le  aiel   ...tah- 
l,,lK.an,le..,flawie,Mr.IiM8,l,ereU.i.,n,  ,„  ..a,.,e  an  1  cireel,  a,  i,  n.-.y  »..„„,«  that  the 
I.arl,e.Ua,li„vlev,when   th.y  ...le.e.l    ini„    ,h-lr  ensa,...„.ent    I..   n,..ke    ihn.   rete.cu.e 
3    Neither  party  c,.„ic.n,,late,  that  the  T.ibunal  will  ..t«hli^l.  „r  U-  i{.„ern.«l   by   rnle,  in 
till*  re.,,ect  which  -ill  eltli.r,  on  the  ..neh.n.l,  ten.l  to  release  neutr,!  tr.„„  th.  ,r  .l.itv  t!! 


40 


5.  LAW|{K\<'K, 


(^'<  rrRE  Point,  Newport,  H.  I.,  > 
May  'JO,  IsTii.     ; 

To  tfte  BVtor  of  the  ProK'lmnce  Jom-mil: 

Sim-  I  n.1,1. rsscl  yoii  a  letu-r  vvwU-w  1  M.-rcssmv,  as  f  conceived, 
l.y  ll.p  a,um,.n.-t.nK"nt  th:,t  th- .„i.rin;.l  At„..n,.aM  >'caso,"  indu-lin.' 
11.0  ..lai...  t;.r  in.liivt  .laina-..s  l.a.l,  Im.!;.,..  its  pivsoMtatio,,  at  (ivit 
c-va,  1.,...,,  .Ml.ini.t.  ,1  ,..  ,„..  an.I  inriv,..!  ,„_v  full  api-mval,  ..irnun. 
staiKv.  luvo  ...•.•Mi'vt.l.  \vl,i,.l,  have  cans,.,!  tin-  ,,u-sti..i,  with  Kiil'. 
lainl,  wind,  tl„.„  in..nan.,la.lis,i,,.ti,,nnf  tl„.  tivafv,  tu  assume 
now  plia^icx. 

It  may  )„■  pm,,,.,-  t,,  mmtin,,  t!,,,,  I  ,„,,,.,■  saw  tl.o  resolution 
"IKtcI  III  tlic  II.MiM.  ,.f  I{.-|.ii.s..ntativ.s  l.v  .Mr.  I'.tors,  tur  tlio 
waivtr  of  the  imlirorl  daims  l-otur,-  .he  i.ul,li,Mii..„  ofmv  com- 
Jmnii('ati.,n,  tliont'l.  it  was  very  satisfaotory  to  mo  to  timl  an'ontiro 
OM,nd.l,Mi..,.  l.rtwiTii  til.'  ph.|H„iti,„„  Letoiv  C.n-ross  ami  the  eon- 
diiM-Ms  at  whirl,  I  l.a.l  arrivo.l,  espeoially  ns  ro-Anlo.l  tl.o  meaning 
ot  ,f,„;r.M  s.ttl,,,..,,!,  (.m|.l..yc.l  in  the  piotoool,  aiwl  ns  to  tl.o  nttor 

'"^ 'l-atal.ilily  .,fih..  jMovisions  ,.f  the   tioaty,   for  determining 

soparaldy  ihr  iial.ility  as  to  earh  ve,»el  with  any  rlaims  that  couia 
he  pie^enle.!  f -r  iii.lireot  .!ama;j:es.      (See  Appendix.) 

Tho  .admisMon.  in  tho  <emi-ntlidal  statements  a^-ribod  to  tho 
Dopartmeiilof.Stat..,  as  wdlasin  ,!,.■  reoei.t  <-orrespondenee  ho- 
tweenih.-tuo -'.NeniMirnts  !;iid  iMl'MiethrSriiato,  that  thc  Tnitod 
Sc.los   do   „..t   and  I'over  did  eontemplatu  any  peouniarv  •lamni.'os 

fi-om  indiie.'t  or  naii il  h.sses,  mi-l.t  well  have  induced'  the  hellcf 

that  notl.im,'  ivmain.d  to  eml.arrass  the  future  proce.din-s  ,.f  the 
arl.itiato.-s.  The  Secrotaiy  of  Stato  would,  it  was  Ihou-ht^  without 
striotly  inquiring  into  the  ri^d.t  of  the  nou>e  ot  llepresentativos  to 
n.lvise  II,  relation  to  our  toiei;,'!!  afVaiis,  have  -ladly  availed  him- 
self ot'  the  moral  saiietioi,  atV-uded  l>y  tho  immediate  represcnta- 
lives  of  the  p.-ople,  to  escape  from  the  iMteniatioiKd  emi.arrassmeiits 
induced  by  the  too  zealous  advoe.iey  of  nur  supposed  interests* 
by  those  to  whom  the  propai'atiou  of  thc  ••  case"  kdoie  the  Geneva 
Trihiinal  had  Ikcii  .';itru>ted. 

Such,  however,  was  not  the  view  taken  l.y  our  minister  of  foreign 
alVaiis.  A  negotiutioi.  was  initiated,  tl.o  apparent  ol.ieet  of  which 
was  tu  induce  Kngland  to  atfoid  u>  an  r.polouy,  '.,  recx<.le  from  our 


if 

il 


"0. 


^xr--m 


■f 


"*"*°?2"" 


V   I' I 


1   f 


t  ' 


60 

iinti-ii:iltl<'  |Mi^itiiiii,  without  n)i|ii>iU'iii^  to  yi<'M  uii,vtliiii<r  which  \vi> 
hail  |Mt'viiiii>ly  a<l\ jiiici'iI. 

A  jVoiiit  has  ht'cii  \\\\\A\'  in  lhi><  iiiaittr,  tht  loin  of  which  uc 
coiik'ns  oui-:'.i'ivi'M  wholly  iiica|iahlc  ut  ci.iii|'iclu'iMliii^'.  Whctln-r 
the  ciaiiiiJ*  I'nr  iii.liicci  (laiiia'j;c-<,  as  |in'H(iitci|  in  our  "  t'aso," — that 
Ih  to  wiy.  lor  the  cnhanccil  |)ayriit  iits  of  insurance,  the  transhr  of 
It  lar^c  |iart  ot  tho  Auicricau  coninicrcial  marine  to  the  Itrili^h  tlai,',' 
ami  llir  |i|o|iuij;ati(«ii  o|'  tlic  war, — arc  avowoily  u  ilhilrawn,  or 
whclluT  lln\  aic  <lci  lauil  iiv  ihc  'riiliuiial,  iiy  oiirowu  rioMcst.  in- 
ailnii«>ililc.  has  ever  a|>|icarc(I  to  us  to  |ircNCMt  a  ilistinction  without 
a  (lillcrcncc.  If,  inili'cil,  there  wanany  |»ret'eri'nfe  hetween  thftwo 
|.ro|io(*itions,  it  vmhiM  l.e,  fur  that  course  which,  at  tliecailiest  .jay. 
wouhl  leniove  from  notici'  pretensions  uhich  Auuiicans  can  lU) 
hui-^er  re;;ar(|  with  sati^fiction.  When  we  lirst  saw  llu' *•  ease,'' 
we  tli'l  not  aihiM'  llie  vii|»|(i(ssi..u  of  the  matter  connecleij  with 
the  iu'liieel  claims,  ami  which  emlua<'ei|  in  its  ori^^inal  >ccp|ie  all 
injuries  arisiiii;  from  what  we  deenu'"!  uiifi  iemlly  acts  of  KnuianJ, 
^'oiiiu;  liack  even  lo  ••  the  preinalure  re<o^r||iii,,n  nf  rclti  I  Iteiliycr 
ency,"  hecause  we  supiMiM  ,1  ijial  Knuiaoil  w-iiM  ulijecl  to  those 
claims  jKoinir  liefore  the  TrilMiual,  l»ul  on  account  of  the  lui-jmlice 
which  the  |ires(  iitatien  of  unlenalile  ih  uiamls  wmuM  cause  t..  <.ur 
nu-ritorious  reclamatiiuis. 

The  publicists  of  I'Jir.ipi    haM',  il  is  true,  heeu    in'i-upvini;    tluin- 
stlves  with  the  alistract   point,  to  which  .Mr.  l'"i>h  semis    to    ha\e 
altacheil  so  much  importance.     Amon^re/inl  writiiiL."»  oi  that  kiu>l, 
which  ha\e  re.aehe.l    usuithina    lew    'l.i_\s,  .ami  which  are    uncler- 
sloml  to  lie  the  same  that  are  alluile>l  to  ill  a  semi-oHicial  anmimue- 
inenl  from  the    Depailmenl  ot    Slate,  are   aiticles  from  the  pt>n»  of 
two  emiiieiii  cMutinental  writers,  whose  frieii.|shi|i  it  h.is  loiiy  lie.n 
my  happiiHvs  t.-   enjoy,  ami  whose   opinions  I   sliouM   l»e    the  l.ist 
man  In  iiieh  i  \  iliic.     .M.   Itujin  .lai"iueiiiMi>.,   hMU,'\er,  in  contend- 
in>;  lor  the  Jmi-licli..n  of  ihe   ••'I'rilMin.il,"  waives  the  questn>n    of 
the  v.arnliiy  -.f  the  iielirecl  claims,  thouirh  hi'  h-.aves   little  doul.l  as 
to  his  ..piliiMii  nil  thi'  Mihject ;  {<^>i,h/ii,it  ,nat«  stir  In  phis,  /mitri/l' 
ilii<lijf'iri:i,ilaii,ili,iHaiiuiic(iin.)  While  ,M.  I'r.ulier  Kodero,  in  in.sist- 
iui,'  that  the  iJoar.l  should  adjudicate  upon  them,  imtonly  declares 
Ihem  worlhli'^s.  Imt  niaiiit  liiis  that  it,  [\\m\  any  cause,  dam  i'.,'es  on 
accounl  ..fill, 11,  sli.mld  he  accorded,  KiiHrlan-l  will   have  a  ri^'ht  to 
decline  to  fiilliii  the  aw,iid>.   (I.i  ,/ii>/.i(lon'f'  /'  Alihamaet  le  tlroit 

ih-i  i/()IS. 


M  itiivlliiiiir  wliicli  \vi> 


11 
In  <'..nHi.|,.rin!,'  IIm'  iri,'l,t  fu  n\,}ori  (.,||„.  .li^rnssiuii  ..fa  ,■!, 


I'f  witli'liaw    fVtiiii  the  <i|it>rati<)ii  of 


nin  or 


lui   aw.ir.l  III)  a  m  itt.-r  .I(><'ini><l 


i>v  ..MP  i>t  III..  |.,.iln-s  II. .t  wilhiti  Ml..  <-,.m|„.|,.n .f  tl„.    arl.if..|N,  f 

w.Mil.l  remark  tint    «•<■  are   n.-f    t .iii;.,in.|  llic    Hiai-a.-t.^r  of  iui 

i.il..rniti..Mal  trilnr  al  with  a  "  ivl.,..,..-.."  iin.|..r  mm.i..i|.al  law.,  fti 
till'  lall.'r  (•a....jii,|irial   saii<'ti..n    may   h..    yiv.'n    t..  ih..  a.l  ..f    f|,u 

parties  l,y  luakiiii?  it,  a  riilo  of  e..tirt,  an.|   tl rmii  ,,f  Law  wlii.^li 

III..  rofer...M  iii  ly  mike  are  ojmmi  to  r,.viHi,,.,  l.v  fi,,.  i„i._j,.^  ,.,.vor.|- 
it..,'  t..  est  il.lislie.l  »;„•„,..  I„  f|„.  ..  ,„.  „,•  ,  ,v.Mvi.4„"states  tliere  iit 
""  '-ilHinal  l.Mt  tl...  ..„.■  t„  wl.i.-l.  |||,.y  have  v..l,intarilv  .♦iil.jeete.l 
theiiis.lv.s.  aii.l  if  Ih.^y  .Mini.. I  ii,|er,„w,.  a.  t..  the  "i.iris.|'ieti..ii, 
lle'iVMii-lil  1...  n..  limit  t.  the  inur|..li,,n,  thi-..n-li  i-„,,ranee  ..r 
.Ie,i.,r„.  „fa.l,itr.,l..rs  wl,..  mij.f.  i„  r..i,.|eri.i- their  .leeisi.ms,  Im 
iiilliien.v.l  l.y  the  |,.,lili..  ,1  relation.,  einii-..!  |.eihips  sineo  llio 
eomiiHii.-eiifiit  ,,1'  th..   ..■r..r..n....,    (,  hi.-h    th.ar   .s,.ver..ii,ms   Lore   to 

th.'   |f>|>.  .list'   |.:||li..».' 

The  only  .|iie-<ti..M  wh^rh  ,■  m  iri..  i,i  thi,  miller  is  wli..ther  the 
int.-r|.  Hiii.ii  in  a.'isewher..  the  sMl.j.vf  was  ii,,i  in  th..  .•..nti.m- 
l.iati.n  of  the  |.r,,i..^ii„.,r  ,,„.|y.  shill  |,r. ]-  ,„•  folh.w  the  awar.l 

As  I,,  ih,.  r..|.i|.Iiatiun,  even  ..f  an  ;.w ml  alrei.ly  ma  le,  tli.-ie  in  a 
piv.'e.lent  in  th.-  .liplomatie  hist..ry  ..f  th.'  I'nite  j  States  aiel  tJreat 
Hritain,  to  whi.li  we  alln.Ie.l  in  ..nr  last  l.-n.-r.  Th..U'^'h  the  l''iiite<l 
States  asserte.l.  in  ih"  .•  is,.  .,f  the   le.rth.' istepi   l.omi.lary,  that  the 

Kiic_'  of  tie-  N'.th.'r!  ui.ls  ha  I  e\c 1..  1  his  anlhorit.\ .  sii.'li  was  n..t 

the  view  ..f  the  ISiitish  i,'..veriimenl,  wh-.  sail,  as  we  ii..w  siy,  that 
I'l.-  arbiter  was  th.'  ..nly  enai|M.r.>rit  jii.lLje  ..f  his  iiiris,|ieti..n.V 

'i'he  re.a-iil  eorrevi  m,|,.||.-,.  transmitie.l  to  the  Senate,  with  n 
l.r..p..Mw|  sni,|,I,Mn.niary    tivaty,  .iis..|,,M's   m..re   fully  than  we  ha.I 

•Tl..Mlm|.t,-r  ..I.    I,i<l,r,,i  ,■/,„„„   |„   ,)„.  AimTlnin  ar«ii„.,.„r  .•,,,1.11.  r  ...s  .,  »..r:.l  ,< 
.■-Mi..,,,  i„  t|„.  i,i.ll«.il,.rv  .m..!  ..r  4.1  li,i,T.,;,tl..n  il  attur.l.  cl„.  liiKt  ..t  whi.li.  :...  Kivni  l.i 
ll...  U..Ku>nt..  ,.J  lTu.li,.rH-.,.|„...,  i.,.  «h.-,L.  ,...•...,•,.,..  l,„r.l„.,„.  rou.l.T.,1  wi.li.,...  milll.„,i,t 
...ll...0t.v..f,il,«  i.,.rl,.r  11...  ,uHln.!..r.,  .,r  «!,.,..  i!;..v  l.iiw   ni;..U<  a  .1..  M,,,,  ,„,.>|.|..  ,>r 
I'i'l I  111.'  I.TIIIS  .>t   Itli'  r  i...|iroilllv. 

ri,.-r..  i,,,,|i„,,, ,,„,.„  |,..|„,.,.|.  il„,  Kr-...!.  l:uv  uMl   ih.-l-:.,».||,i.  .•..miii.i.i  l.n     .»..    toil.,. 

'.■'^rt-.,    ,-vi.m-.M.v    lii.llvi.l.ials    In   .iit.niitlii.;!  timiii*   ta    nil   Hrl.ili.ili..|i.     IIv    tlia 

'.>•..■■,. 111. liikttl...|H.|.,|..iii'.v„|,„i  .ithltrail.ii..  iW.m:,.i  w   n  ,  r.-v.H-.ii.in.   ex.vpt  i.y  the 

..imn(....u.»,-.,„«<iil  ,.rth«  iB.rtj..,,  »lil|i.  l.y    ,i.i.  larfr.  «  |..rly  n.,»y   will.,|ri.w  i.t  anv 

•ii,„.  t,..r,.r,.  the  »«„r.l.     Ai.l  iIlmi^jI,  (,y  nrt  nf  I'.irll  u........  .1„.  r.ile  in  i:.i«Ui„l  h,»  Imwi 

.1.  ..,i..-.|.  i»  r.-v,KiHI-M  i»  Mill  ii.lml,,,|,li.  l.y    jfivo  i,r  •«  .l.i.ltf...       In   il,„  I'l.ii,.  |  St.ite.t  tlic 


1 


;!'n!:^"'V;i;ot;;V.^Kr"  '"•"■  ""•  "•"'""'■ "  --'•-•' '»v.-k..i  .w;i:..T.,';;;-.;;-„rv.:;. 


.^^.asae*^ 


52 

proviotisly  stated  it,  tlie  nnalogons  case  l«'toio  the  board  sitting  at 
Wa?Iiington.  It  was  pn.fi-ssodly  dofido.i  <m  its  iiu-ritrs  and  witirout 
relerenco  to  tlio  .lucslion  ut' Jiirisdictiuii,  tliouyii  it  was  clearly  out 
of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  i-ominissioners,  wht-tlior  the  claim  was  or 
was  not  exi'lndcd,  <liivctiy  or  by  iin|ili(Mti(iii,  in  the  ireatv.  The 
claim  was  tor  a  part  of  the  eonfod,.iate  cotton  <lc]»t  hehl'in  Eng- 
land and  was  conscpientiy  one  of  contract,  while  the  convention 
only  applies    i.)  acts  commiltcd  against   persons  and  property. 

It  was  moreover  directly  exclu  led  by  the  Conslit.ition  o't  the 
I  mte.l  Slates.  Tiie  cominissioners  placed  their  decisic.n  on 
what  they  conceived  to  be  the  riLrJils  of  the  I'nited  Slates 
"to  eru-ih  the  rei»el  orginiz  ition,  an.l  to  seize  all  its  assets  and 
properly,  whetlier  hypothecated  by  it  or  not  to  its  creditors."* 
It  was  of  course,  within  their  judicial  discretion  to  come  to  another 
conclusion,  on  this  p..int.  and  f  .r  which,  indeed,  thev  minht  have 
found  as  pretexts  the  decisions  of  Knglish  triimn.tjs,  to  which  the 
Uidled  States  were  recently  a  parly,  it  not  judgments  of,,,,,-  own 
courts.  IJnt  liad  they  done  so, ,.,.  construction  of  international  rights 
and  obligations  would  have  juMilic<l  any  depaiiment  ol  the  I'nUed 
States  governm.'iit  in  ivcugnizi„g  tju'lr  awaid  :  iiia.Minich  .as  the 
fomteentli  ainendnient  of  th,'  c..n>titiiii,„,  vlii,.],  i.s  paramount  to 
all  tre.aly  oMigatiun-,.  pn.vides,  amo,,.,.  ,,ther  things,  that  '-neitlu.r 
the  United  St.ites  nor  an.\  St.ate  shall  asMime  ..r  pav  any  debi  or 
obligation  incnrie<l  in  .-ii  I  of  insuiavdi,,,,  ,,,■  ,el»elli,".n  against  the 
I'lMted  Slates,  or  .my  cliim  lor  tli.'  lo.s  or  .'mancipation  of  any 
slave,  but  all  such  debt-,  .-blj-ations  ,in,l  cl.ums  shall  !,,.  1„.1,|  jl|o. 
eg.al  .and  \  ojd." 

[XorM,,uld  this  havcbcM.  llir  tiist  tiim.lhal.a  treat  v  stipulation 

With  usii.-.s  been  -bliL'edtoshl.ltna  constitution.alpioVivi,,,).   The 

consular  convenli.n    of  Is.".;}   ui,h    K,.,.,,,,.^.    ....ntaius  an    article  of 

M-hich    the  Cms,,!    ;n   s,n    K,-..i,cisco.    ls,-,|,   ...tt.-mpi.d   lo    avail 

hinueU:     Th.'  -iMl,  am.-ndnieni  ,.\-  the  Cuisiituii l.-chues   tl,at 

•Th.- l.il|.,»Mn!  i,  il,,-  ju.lj;ii,fiii  ih  liAloiKri  v..  i,ii.  IM  rn>  Si  a  TKii. 
"TlitM  ..iiiirii»»(.iii  in  .ir  .•(liiii.  II  ijiiii    Mil-  Chill'.!  Siiii,.«  i«  i,,,t    tr.i.iJr-.i 
<iel.i»o.iirri.t..,ii.v,|,..  i,l..'i,„ri„.niif»  ""l.l^  l..r  ll,e  |„iv  i„„„,  „f 

IZ»ll.i||,.ICMl,-.|    l,V  IIM.I    «|tl,     ll„.     1.       ,,  ,'„''."',  '     ^'■'     "■'"■'    "fl."ll- 


\    N 


d 


I 


63 


in  all  crimiiml  prosecutions,  "the  accmed  shall  have  a  right  to  be 
confionteil  with  the  witnesses  against  him,  and  to  have  compulsory 
process  for   oblainir.g    witnesses  in  iii-  favor." 

The  convention  provides  that  "the  Consul  generals,  consuls,  vice 
consuls,  or  c.nsular  ag.M.ts,  as  well  as  the  consular  pupils,  shall 
never  be  compelled  to  apjiear  as  witnesses  before  the  courts. 
When  any  declaration  for  Judieial  purposes,  or  deposition  is  to  be 
received  trum  them,  in  the  administration  of  ,usti,-e,  they  shall  be 
invited,  in  writing,  to  appear  in  court,  and  if  unable  to  do  so,  their 
testimony  shall  be  requested,  in  writing,  or  be  taken  orally  at  their 
ilwel  lings." 

There  was  a  real  inherent  eml)arrassment  iii   this  matter,  ari.infr 
from  an  apparent  conHict  of  the    conventi.ui  with  the  amendmeia 
of  the  c.ustilulh.u    as  ab,>ve  cited,  which    gives   to    defendants 
in    criminal    pn.secutions   the    right   ot    compulsory    process    for 
witnes.ses.     This    w.-.s    not    applicable    to   persons    then    exempt. 
As  the  law  of  nations  stoo.l,  when  the  constittition  went  into  effect, 
ambassadors  an.l  ministers   could   not  be  served  with  compulsurv 
J>rocess  to  appear  as   witnesses,  and  the    clause  in  the  constitution 
releired  to  did  nut  give  the  defen  lent  iu  enmiual  prosjcutioiis  the 
light  to  compel  their  atteiidmcc  in  court.     IJut  wlnt  was  the  case 
in  this  respect  .as  to  consuls"^     Tiiey  h.d  M„t   the  diplomatic  privi- 
leges.     Afterfhe  adoption  of  the  constitution,  the  defendant,  in  a 
criminal  prosecntio,,,  had  the  right  ot  com|.ui.oiy  pro.^css  to  bring 
into  court,  as  a  witness,  any  foici-n    coumiI  uhat'evcr.     This  could 
not  be  taken  .au.iv  ]n   treaty.     (  Mr.  Many,  Secret:.rv  of  State,  to 
Mr.  >Jas.,n.  .Mini>t..,  in  I'aris,  Sepicml.ci  1  1,  ls,-,t  )     And  in  a  sub- 
Hcpient  dcsp;uch,  ( October  li:!,  IS.'.tj  Mr.  Muicv  savs  that  his  con- 
struction  is  sustained  by  the    Attorney    (icneial   and  all  the  mem- 
bers  of  the  Cabinet. 

Afi.-r  the  subject  had  been  refeiie  1  to  j,,  the  President's  Mes- 
sage <.f  December.  ls.-,4,  ,.,„  \  i,.^.,,  ,li,,.„..,,,|  ;„  ,,.,,,.,,,.,1  ^.„„„nuni. 
cations  between  tiie  two  governments,  in  w|,ieh  a  iiioliticatioi,  of 
the  treaty  ha-l  l.een  pio|.oscd,  to  adapt  it  to  the  provisions  of  the 
constitu:ion.  the  m.itter  w.is  fi,Mlly  M-tlle  1  l,v  the  inlerchan-e  of 
notes  between  Mr.  .M  rs,,n  and  Count  W.dewski.  of  the:j  1  and  7th 
ot  Auifusl,  Is.-..-.,  1,1  accordance    with  a  -lesp.itch  of  Mr.    M.ircy,  of 

the  l^th   oh  .I.MHiarv.     .\i .4    ..tlier    arrangements,    iiistniet'ions 

W(tv  to  beseni  to    the    French    Consuls  i„  the    I'mted    States  to 
attend  and  testify  according  to  the  treaty,  and    unless  i„    cases  of 


•V 


I 


H's 


^'"^"'•^SMgr 


II 


iSiW%v:;-^.;M 


it! 


64 

actual  iiialiility,  there  was  to  be  no  refusal  tlicreafter.— Zt/irrericc's 

It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  so  far  I'roiu  tlie  (liK|)osifioii  whieh 
was  made  of  the  ease  at  Wasliington  lu'iiigaii  argument  in  fiivor  of 
En"land's  allowing  the  indireet  claims  to  go  before  the  triltunal  at 
Geneva,  the  facts  n<>\v  stated  show  that  the  government  of  the 
United  States. >ught  t<>  have  <in  their  jiart  done,  in  the  tVirmer  mat- 
ter, wiiat  Englanil  now  proiioscs  to  do  as  to  the  indirect  claims, — 
refused  to  jtermit  any  action  of  the  connnissioners  in  ilie  premises.* 

All  that  has  ooein'red  since  oin-  Inst  letter  salivfifs  iis  that  wliat 
we  then  endeavored  to  inge.  what  ex-Presidint  Woolsey  and  liev- 
erdy  .Tohiison  recommended,  and  what  it  was  the  object  of  the 
resolution  in  the  House  of  liepresentatives  to  accomplisli,  was  the 
I'orreet  course,  if  not  the  oidy  one,  by  which  the  sobition  of  the 
jiresent  dithculties  can  be  attained.  'I'he  I're>ident  ha\  ing  through 
his  agent,  presented  claims,  whieli,  whether  teciinicaliy  admissible 
t>r  not,  all  parties  agree  can  havi-  no  practical  effect,  he  is  the  compe- 
tent an<l  suitable  authority  to  withdraw  thiin.  I  regret  to  Hnd  it 
suggested  in  journals,  with   whose   opinions    on  public  law  it    has 

•  III  rflalion  to  tl:p  cotton  clttimR.  tlie  t'lVPtB  us  Atn^ol  by  Lonl  (iniiivilie.  In  liU  linto  uf 
March  20,  1ST2.  t"  <ii  iieral  Solieiick.  aro  oh  lullnws:— 

■On  llio  nil  "f  NdV.iiilicr,  ill   iiiii>imii.i'  .it   tliu  ({••mitiiI   liistni.'tioii^  which    liml  Khmi 

given  ti>  Hit  .MaJi'My's  aui'nt.  11   diiini    uik^iih   I I  jhsiumI  liy  the  m-ralleil   Coiit'tHlcrale 

Sliitr>  f.ir  a  "iiMi  tDriiiiiiK  partut'ii  loan  ralloil  tlio  ('.rtl.in  I,.>an."  cioilraoto.l  Nv  tlinne 
Statei'  ami  lor  the  iiaynifiil  nl  which  iiTtaln  cciltun  Hoi/.ml  hy  the  I  iiileil  .Slafi's  wnn  alleged 

ed  ii  have  heeii  ln|"itl ateil  liy  the  (Ji'iit'cilerMle   HMveriiiuenl.  wiu  lileil  hi  Wa»hlin{ion  ; 

and  MM  Ihe  21(11,  I  learnt  inini  ymi  ihal  Ihe  I'niled  States  g.iveriinient  ohjeetci  tu  ihilnm 
ofthis  kind  l»MnKevtii  jireKented. 

•  Tiie  destpatehcH  Ir.'in  Her  Ma,ie-»t\!i  aueiit,  niviii),'  the  detaiW  .it  the  nature  of  the  elalm. 
nnil  (il  the  demurrer  made  I"  it  hy  llic  I'lilleil  Sialen  aKeiil.  did  iiul  reaeh  rne  until  the  Otb 
(.f  Peeemlier.  I  hml  in  the  nieaniiine  awerlaliuHl  tV..iii  Sir  K.  riiornl..n,  that  the  e\pren»- 
ii'li  '  nets  enniinilleil'    had  l«en  used  h\  ii.utiial  aKreemeni  in  tha  niKdtintiunK  whieli  pre- 

redeil  the  a]'|uiintliient  ..I  the  lli|;li  Om ««i..ii  widi  ;i  view  |.>  exellide  ehiim.x  .if  tlii-  elan* 

fr.inilheciinMderatiiiii.il  the  lli«h  CuiumlM'hinerii;  tlmite  wmd:.  U-Iiik  aluo  ii>wi|  In  the 
Xntli  Arliile  iiltlie  Treaty  with  ri'tjanl  t..  private  elaiiii!!  Ihe  iiiieKtti.n  was  liro'.ijcht  l>e- 
turelhe  Cahlnet  at  UK  next  nieeliiig  .m  the  mii.  and  »im  linally  deeided  on  the  Hlh.  ut.  re- 
eiirde<l  in  a  miiiuti.  hy  Mr.  (11  a.lHi.iiie  'l'hi«  .lu.ixl.in  wai*.  that  the  Contederale  ('ntlnii  ehiliua 
idiinild  ii.il  1k' jiiewntcd  nnk'iM<  in  <fu«e  iif  hiiii.lii  exchaiik'iil  for  entinii,  whUh  lind  thereliv 
ln.eniiie  the  a<  liial  |ir<i|>erty  oI'lheelBlnianti',  and  dlreetl.mi  were  g\\tn  lor  «  desimtch  to 
Ire  Sent  to  thin  eH'cet." 

■  Iiit'orniaiion  reai;he<l  nie  the  next  morniiijj  Jiy  telegraph  ol  the  a<IJndieatioii,  wlilch  Her 

MiOeHty'sgoveri iit  hud  nut  ei|>eete<1  to  take   (ihiee.  ii|>.in  the  inerltit  ofihe  elalni  hy  the 

('.iiiinii«!'iiiiieri>,  Thi»  re.|uirel  a  re<  onriderutl.'ii  of  tlie  iiintriieilniiii  and  lre«li  inttriirlioiig 
were  sent  hy  the  iiinil  of  the  il  I.  and  al»  i  l.y  telegraph.  In  Sir  I'.,  'riiorntoii  lu  arrange  with 
>lr.  Firli  that  the  iirewntailon  ot  i'laiin<>  wliieh  :i|i|ieared  to  he  toatiilesily  vtitli.i.ii  the 
teriunof  the  ireatv  should  tie  withheld  and  that  when  Her  Majemv!!  ag.ni.was  ul  o|iin|..n 
that*  .laini  1  eliiiged  to  a  elani.  that  lUjjht  n.il  to  lie  preseiite.!,  it  would  I"-  de^lralile  ilmt 
»ii  iHireeineiil  til  that  ertWt  slmiiM  U- made  and  ^igllel|  hy  liir  K.  Tli.iriil..ii  ai..|  Mr  Ki»h. 
Tliew  iii»ti  ueli..ni«  were  eoniiiiunii  au.l  t..  Mr.  Kmli.  ' 


\' 


\.<) 


eafter. — Lawrence's 


I  (intllVilll'.   ill  Ills  llntO    ot 


56 

ever  heretotor..,  l.oe„  my  s.uisfaotion  to  oononr,  that  the  country 
would  be  (legra.le.l  l.y  with.lrawing  pietonsioMH  wl.ich  everyone 
iioiv  agrees  were  most  una.lvi.se.lly  i.resente.I.  I  am  not  aware 
that  there  is  any  .liflerenee  in  prineiple  between  the  rules  of  pri- 
vate  con.luet  ami  those  whi.-h  shoul.l  control  the  action  of  nations. 
It  an  m.livMlual  preferre-l  a  claim  against  another,  which  subsequent 
investigation  showe.l  him  to  be  untenable,  can  anv  one  <loubt  his 
«iuty  to  immetliately  with.liaw  it? 

X-.t  only  as  it  seems  to  us  wouM  the  .lirect  with.lrawal  of  these 
claims  have  been  the  course  most  honorable  to   the  Unite.!  State, 
ami  most  agreeable  to  the  otKcer  charge.l  with   the  a.lministration 
ot  our  foreign  artairs,  but  it  had  the  advantage  of  not  re-mirin-'  the 
co-operation  of  other  parties  at   home  or  abroad.     In    thus   ^u^., 
the  I'res.dent   would  have,  in  the  exercise  of  his  legitimate  author- 
ity,  not  have  been  exposed  to  the  risk  of  having  his  course  thwart- 
e<l  by  impediments  growing   out   of  either   l-arliamentary  or  con- 
gressional controversies.     I„  attemplinu  to  obtain  fro,,,  the  n.itish 
government  some  action    by  which    we  may   appear  •' in  chan-^i,,.. 
tront     not  to  make   any   concessions,  the   I'lesi-lent  has   n„t  only 
involved  us  in    questions  liable    to  be  art'eeted    bv    the  stability  of 
the  English  ministry,  but  h.as    rendered  necessarv  the  assent  of  the 
i^enate  to  any  measme  whi.-h  may  be  le.pii.ed  to  extricate  ,h  from 
the  dilemma.     We  certainly  would  not   advise   anv    usurpation  of 
the  appropnate  powcs  of  that    body,  but    neither'  is  it    advisable 
that  the  President  should   divest  himself  of  the    responsibility  at- 
tached  to  his  offi,-e.     The  new  article   is  not  only  open    to  discus- 
sion on  Its  merits,  but,  as  was   maintained    by  Mr.  Webster    when 
rresi.lent    Jackson    submitte.l    to    the  Senate    the    m.rtheastern 
hoiindary  award,  to  the  ol,jection    that  the   action  of  that  bodv  is 
uot  re.,uired  in  conducting  orcarrrying  into  effect  the  proceedings 
bptore  an  arbiter;  nor  can  it  be  doubted  that  the  difficulties  which 
the  executive  would,  in  any  onlinary  case,  encou„ter  in  procurin.^ 
tiie  necessary  assent  of  two-thirds  of  the    Senators,    have  been  in" 
crea.sed   by  the    partisan  char.acter  which    the    negoti.itions  have 
been  made  to  assume,  by  the  exclusion  of  a  portion  of  their  mem- 
bei-s  t,om  the   .-onsultations  fo    which  the    IVesident  invite.l    the 
toreign  committees  of  the  two    Houses.     For    our  own  part     co,,. 
sideling,  as  we  do,  that  all  <,,:estions   connected  with  our   liuei-Mi 
relations  should  be  kept  aloof  fnm»  matters  that  divide  us  at  hoine 
we  trust  that  no  Senator  will  permit   himself  to   be    influenced    iix 


^-^mmm^^ 


56 

bis  vote  by  any  considerations  bearing  t»n  the  Prosidentiai  elec- 
tion. It  cannot,  however,  escape  observation  that  journals  under- 
stood to  tavortlie  elevation  uf  a  candidate  to  the  executive  oftice 
other  than  the  present  incumbent,  are  not  loth  to  take  advantage 
of  the  embarrassments  of  the  dijilomatic  labyrinth,  into  which  tlie 
Secretary  of  State  has,  in  attenijtting  to  avoid  a  direct  reversal  of 
the  previous  action  of  tlie  government,  involved  us. 

And  here  we  cannot  refrain  tVoiri  suggesting  that  instead  o{ 
making,  for  a  special  occasion,  a  new  rule  of  international  law,  the 
inconvenience  of  which  in  future  ca>es  it  is  imiiossible  to  foresee 
the  subject  i?liouId  be  remamled  to  the  executive,  either  leaving  it 
wliere  the  cnnstitutiun  places  it,  to  liis  exclusive  discretion,  or 
with  a  rtcominendation  similar  to  that  embraced  in  the  propose<l 
resolution  of  the  House  of  JJepresentatives.  Itidewd.  the  diHicuIties 
already  experienced  in  preparing  anything  accei>tablo  to  tlie  two 
governments,  and  the  objections  of  a  contrary  character  raised  to 
Xhv  projet  by  different  parties,  would  indicate  a  simple  witinlrawai 
of  the  obnoxious  claim-;. 

Xo  stipidation  of  a  permanent  character  cau  well  be  made  with 
reference  to  tlie  indlr'X'f  lo^o s,  which,  in  the  iliseus>iuns  connected 
witli  the  Alabama  claims,  have  been  frei[uently  ret'erred  to  a* 
synonymous  with  natlomd  lOi*sei>,  without  first  establishing  a  more 
accurate  definition  of  such  claim«i  than  any  rei-ogni/.ed  rule  of  in- 
terpretatioii  now  lurnishe<.  The  national  e\pen<Utiires  in  pur>uit 
of  the  confederate  cruisers  were,  of  course,  incurred  by  the  United 
State?,  and  cannot  be  enumerated  among  individual  losses,  vet 
they  are  classed  liy  u<  amonglho  <lirect  claiu\«.  nor  are  tliev  etiu. 
merated  in  the  Ihitish  |irole>t  agaiu>t  in-firirf  rl,ili,i.^  ji"  being  in- 
admissible. It  is.  intleed,  sai<l  in  the  counter  case,  ••  it  would  l»e 
plainly  unreasonable  to  contenil  that  if  a  failure  of  duty  could  l»e 
e>tabli>lied  again>t  (Jreat  Ibitain.  ni  respect  to  a  given  vessel.  al[ 
that  has  been  expended  l»y  the  I'nited  .States  in  trying  to  capture 
her  niu>t  be  .assumed  to  be  chargeable  against  this  country.  IJut 
the  British  govermnent  takes  exceptiouv  to  thix  cla^s  of  claims 
altogether.  It  cannot  be  admilteil  that  they  are  properlv  to  be 
taken  into  account  l»y  the  arbitrators,  ur  that  (Jreat  iJrit.iin  can  be 
fairly  charged,  at  once  with  the  losses  which  a  l>elligerent  cruiser 
has  inflicted  during  her  whole  carter,  and  with  what  the  I'nited 
States  m.ay  think  tit  to  allege  that  they  vainly  sjicrit  in  endeavor- 
ing to  capture  that  ciuiser."     So  tar  as  regards  the  pre^ent  contro- 


Proeidential   elec- 
nt  juuniitis  iiiitler- 

e  t'xeculivc   office 

»■ 

to  t.'ike  advjiiitage 
itli,  into  which  tlie 
direct  reversal  of 
us. 

J  that  instead  of 
■miitioiiiil  iiisv,  the 
iksmIiIl'  to  foresee 
',  either  leaving  it 
iive  discretion,  or 
1  in  the  iirojuisetl 
.'wl,  the  dirtieuities 
Iit:iI)lo  to  tlie  two 
•liaracter  raised  to 
iiui'le  witli<hawai 

ell  be  made  with 
iissittns  connected 
ly  ret'erred  to  as 
talilishing  a  more 
ni/.cd  rule  of  in- 
ditiires  in  piUMiit 
I'd  liy  the  United 
ridiial  losses,  yet 
f>v  are  tht-y  cnn. 
litii))  as  hciiii^  in- 
ave,  ••  it  wouM  We 
ol  duty  ctiidd  l>e 
»  Liivfii  vessel,  ail 
;ryiiig  to  capture 
lis  country.  Hut 
>  chws  of  claims 
0  ipro|,(rly  to  ho 
at  IJritain  can  be 
■lliLterent  crui.ser 
khat  the  United 
I'nt  in  endeavor- 
e  |lre^enl  contro- 


57 

versy,  the  recital,  in  the  proposed  supplementary  treaty,  of  the 
indirect  claims  for  the  ^^  xadoxaUosses'' ^^hii:h  are  .specifically 
mentioned,  viz:  those  sustained  in  the  transferor  the  American 
commercial  marine  to  the  British  rtng,  the  enhanced  payment  of 
insurance  and  the  prolongation  of  the  war,  (the  national  expendi- 
tnres  m  pursuit  of  the  confederate  cruisers  not  being  named,;  may 
be  sufficiently  exact  to  show  what  jWiVcc^  /'Mw.",  claimed  by  us 
are  to  be  excluded  from  the  action  of  the  tribunal  of  arbitrators,' 
but  it  will  not  clo.se  the  doors  against  future  <lifficulties.* 

It  may  well  be  a  .,uestion  witli  us  whether  by  now  accepting  the 
compensation  which  we  claim  for  our   expenses    in   pursuing   the 
Alabama  and    other  similar  vessels,  we  are  willing  to    establish  a 
l-recedent  which,  under  the  plea  of  the  escape  of  a  crui.ser  of   the 
other  belligerent  from  any  point  uf  our  extensive   sea  coast,  might 
make  us  responsible  for  the   maintenance,  during  anv  war  in  which 
England  might  be  engaged,  of  her  entire  naw  alleged  to  have  been 
sent  in  pursuit  of  her.     h  h  to  he  renKwnbcied  that  for  the  ninety 
years  which  have  elapsed  since    the  recogMii;„u  of  uur  independ- 
cnce,  we  have    been  neutral  for   more  than  eighty,  an.l    that    our 
policy  exer  has  been,  the  recognition    of  neutral  VighLs,  wherever 
they  came   in  collision  witji  belligerent  pretensions. 
^  On  the  other  hami,  ought  not  the  provision,  as  to  indirect  losses, 
It  the  treaty  is  to  be  ma.le  permanent,  be  applicable  to  all  imlirect 
cases  of  national  losses,  that  may   ari.se    from  acts  on  land  as  well 
as  at  sea.     The  terms  .4the  tre.ity  are    in  substance  that  the  Pro- 
sident  of  the  Tnited  States  adopts,  tbr  the  fi.ture,  the  construction 
given  by  the  British  government   to  the  claims  which  wo  agree  to 
abandon  so  far  as  to  declare  that  it    will    hereafter  guide    the  con 
duct  of  the  government  of  the  rnited  .States;  and    "tlie  two  f^ov-* 
enunents  are  therefore  agreed  in  this   respect."     The   commission 
under  the  treaty  of  Washington  for  li.p.idating  the  claims  oftvich 
party  again.st  the  other,  not  included  in  the  provisions  for  the  Ala- 
l>ama  claims,  [;;  confiiie-l  to  Mich   cases  as    arose    before  the  9th    of 
April,  18G5,  and    conse.|Uently  the    Fenian   claims   are    excluded 
Should  they  be  hereafter  brought  forwar.l  a>   reclamations  against 
the  Umte.l  States,  would  the  proposed  rule,  which  applies  in  lerms 
to  the  a.ts  committed  ly  particular  vessels,  bv  reason  u'     '  -  want 
ol  due  .iijigence  imputed  to  Great  Britain   in    the    pertonnance  of 


i 


^ 


!■"  '* 


if  ^j 


iiiiir— ■  -     """"^ 


\l 


!li 


neiitrnl  obligations,  be  applicable  to  the    .Icinands  against  our  gov- 
ernmoht  on  accoiint  ot'ilic  invasion  of  Canada,  y 

In  tho  protocol  of  tbe  4tli  of  May,  1871,  "  the  British  lligli 
Commissioners  sai.l  that  (hoy  wonM  not  uri,'e  fiiillier  that  t'le  set- 
tlement of  these  I'lainiH  (claims  of  the  jieople  ot  Canada  for  injurit.'s 
sutteretl  from  the  Kenian  raids.)  should  be  included  in  t/w  present 
treat;/,  nnd  that  they  had  less  difficulty  in  doinj;  so,  as  a  portion  of 
the  claims  n-ere  of  a  consfni--fir,;  and  ////'/v/f^V^/ character." 

In  alluding  to  the  nvil-enteixhi  betueen  the  two  countries,  it  is 
onlyjnst,  as  an  evidence  ot  the  good  faith  of  Kn.ylan.l.  to  notice 
the  recent  action  of  the  home  government  in  profteiing  to  the 
Dominion,  as  a  considerMion  f.,r  her  assent  to  those  articles  of  tho 
treaty  of  Washington  which  re.|uiivl  the  r.ilitication  of  the  Cana- 
dian  Parliament,  and  as  an  indemnity  for  the  Fenian  claims,  a  guar- 
antee tor  a  loan  to  construct  a  railroad  to  tlie  Pacific.  I  may,''also, 
remark,  in  this  connection,  that  it  is  clearly  inferable  from  iheVecent 
speech  of  the  Canadian  Premier,  (Sir  j..hn  Macdonald)  himself 
one  of  the  late  High  Commi.ssioners,  that  Great  Britain  no  longer 
reganls  those  cl.iims  to  be  of  a  character  ti>  be  a.sserted  by  her 
against  the  Tnited  States,  and  that  the  Dominion  deems  lurself 
anipiy  comj.ensated  by  the  .action  ot]^  the  mother  country  as  to 
the  loan  in  .juestion.  The  objections  to  the  fishery  arfi<-les.  it  may 
be  added,  do  not  come  from  the  maritime  provinces,  but  f  tn  those 
of  the  interior,  who  wishc.l  to  use  the  fisheries  as  a  lever  for  the 
introduction  of  their  cereals  and  other  agricultural  products  into 
the  United  States,  free  of  duty. 

In  the  English  counter  case,  there  is  an  examination  by  the 
e.vperts.  named  by  the  Hoard  ..f  Tr.ade  and  Commissioners  .if  the 
Admiralty  to  whom  the  subject  was  referred  by  the  British  govern- 
ment, of  the  extent  of  the  direct  claims,  according  to  the  ihttu  fur- 
nished  by  the  United  States.  A.-cording  to  the  estimate  made  by 
the  committee  appointed  by  the  lioar.j  of  Trade,  the  total  amount 
claimed  for  priente  losses  is  reduced  from  |il7,7»;:{,()|0  to  I'^.OaO,- 
085,  and  by  the  Report  to  the  Admiralty  all  the  expenditures  in- 
curred  in  the  pursuit  of  the  confederate  vessels  as  claimed  in  tho 
United  States  case,  from  *7.0KO,478  70  to  *l,501),.1((o,  for  tiie 
pursuit  of  ihe  vessels  recognised  as  connected  will,  Alabama  class. 
Thongli  the  British  (Jovernment  deny  that  any  claim  can  be 
preferred  to  the  Geneva  Tribunal,  for  expenses  incurred  in  fitting 
out  vessels  to  cruise  in  pursuit  of  the  Alabama  and  other  ConttuU 


m  '• 


Is  agaiiiHt  our  gov- 

tlio  British  Iligli 
ithor  thi.t  t'ne  set- 
';iii.nl;i  for  injuries 
i]i'<l  in  (/id  present 
so,  as  a  portion  of 
ohaiactiT." 
wo  oountrifs,  it  is 
Ingliind,  to  notice 
prorteriiig  to  tho 
lose  articles  of  tlio 
tion  of  tlie  Cana- 
lian  claims,  agiiar- 
c'ific.  I  may,  also* 
lilt' from  llie  recent 
nc<lonaM)  himself 
15ritain  no  longer 
J  asserted  by  her 
ion  <leems  hvi-seif 
lier  country  as  to 
;ry  articles,  it  may 
109,  but  f'-iin  those 
as  a  lever  for  tlie 
iral   protlucts  into 

ainination  by  the 
imissioners  of  the 
he  Hritish  govern- 
g  to  the  data  fur- 
estimate  matle  by 

the  total  amount 
♦);{,()  10  to  $^,039,- 

cxpvrulituroH  in- 
as  claimed  in  tho 
l,50'),30o,  for  tiie 
:h  Alabama  class, 
my  claim  can  be 
incnried  in  fittiiis: 
iiid  other  Confed- 


erate cruisers,  the  committeo   appointed   by  the   Ad 


liiiguish  lietwcen   tl 


suit  of   those   vessels  and  tl 


ic    expenditures    incurred    in  tl 


J'ioyod  in  the  or.linary  duties  of  a  mil 


le  expenditures  for  tl 


miralty,  dis. 

!ie  actual  pur- 

iiciii   when  em- 


H  given   ns    the    largest  amount   for  uhj.'h    Eufdand 
event   be  liable.     As   it    is  sl,„uii  tint    i 


itary  marine.     The  last  sum 
can  ill  any 


osses,  where   insurance  was   efK-eted,  the  d 


,   in   most    oases  of  private 


by  tl 


IC  original  owner  and  the 
the  most  extravagant  demand 


urn  IS    presented  both 


wouhl 


seem    that  :i 


companies,  while,  in  many  instances, 
made  for  prospective  profits  it 


s  arc 


complications  at  (Jem 


<'""i|'roMiise,    whieh  wouM    avoid    all  (urti 


rect  claims  cease  to  I 


va,  might,  as  in  t 


ler 


I 


ciiiiK.t  close  this  c 


•e  a  subject  of  cont 


ormer  cases,  after  the  indi 


the  discussions  m-ow 


ommunicatioii    without    re 


roversy,  be  possibli 


am 


1. 


an  um 


ii'ig  out  of  the    existing  imbio-d 


marking    that    in 


may  be  deemed  tl 
emphativ  sanction  of  tl 


ue  responsibility   is    imputed  to 
exceptional  matter   of  ti; 


io  with    En< 


at t. ached  as  counsel  to  oi 


le  two    eminent    ex  attor 


<niv   agent  for  what 
e  original  case.     The 


W( 


mM  long  )i,t;)ic  til 


goncy  at  (Jeneva 


iiey    geiierab 


now 


,  was  published  to  the 


tice.     .And 


as  I 


piestif)ns  now  pending  were  bnnight   to 


t  is  well  understood  that,  at  all  event 


no- 


gentlemen  was  .•onsulicd  duriii-  the  whol 


It    IS 


beliei 


c'l  that  nothing  not  approve.l   bv    1 


one  of  these 

c   progress  of    tho  work. 


the  original  case.     The  Secret 


,1  list  I  heat  ion  for 


iiry  of  State    mav,  a! 


II m  was    inserted  in 


t  he 


my  otlicial  coiintcnam.-  that  I 


so.  Well  otter  as 


'•■ase,-  the 


high  aiithoiit\  of  Mv.  ('ii>| 


"c  may  have  given  to 


ling   find  Mr.  K\arts. 
W.  15.  I.AWIJK.VCK 


i 


I 


UKufa.^   Miiiili<'i'il|>|Miiiiii   I       I        mil  


^^^-'^wiet^fs 


'^iS*'*r*' 


fl 


^N. 


61 


42r)  roxoRR.ss. 

'2il  SeitMion. 


Ai>T>r:Nr)rx 


norsE  l)F  HErUKSKNTATIVES.        { 


Mh.  Doc. 
No.   1K(). 


I 


V ATioNs    sTiti  Guusa    ion 


OIM'UKSSKI) 
MUKKTV. 


HACKS     AM) 


Al'lill.  B. 


I.  .«3.-R..f«rre.|  ,«  „.„  c „.U,c«  „„  K„rel«,.  A..,.lr,.„,,  ..r.Iere.I  r.,  Ik,  prlnte.!. 

Mr.  Peters.  <.ji  !,.;,»,.,  imrodiicetl  the  following 

RESOLUTION. 

theH,itishMau%iiUhee,,hunr..  tv  ..  '>'."""'"'  i"  "."""■r^ial  marine  to 
H..,.,.re>sion  •,(tl'..  r'-h"lli, 'n  '•"'^''  ^""'  '"  "'"   •^^•"^  "^  "'«  *««•  ainl  the 

Mth  or  Marrh  :s7ih^v,*  .'.'"'"''  "''^""'^'  ^^  ""'  Alabama  olai.ns.  „„  the 
mate  ...,iii„ale  of  ,h.;  amount  of  tie  si?./  ;«'<•.  alter  ,«vmi:  an  approxi- 
without  prrju-lice.  how-vv  .     I      1       ri  r  •  '"■"}"  *"  "'*'  '"''''•^'•<  '<««''•. 

i"...«.-vin^..,nolr::,;i.';:^lr.:s;;;::,r''' "-'"•» -theiracccm^ 

«ir.-at  llritain  to  the  In     ■     S      «      f  ';"';'  """".wl"eh  >houl.l  I...  ,,a|,l  \,y 

ini!  all  lial.iliiv.  hn         ,     X"        '  ^^^^  .--mmi.Moner.s  .l..,line,|,  ,|,.ny. 

|«.^iii..n  was  i.;v,.,,t.'|,  '       '^  '     '"''*'  "'^"  ''"*''''l'""  '"  arbitration,  which  pri- 

io;^ni  dl"Si:!;::i!':|.,;;:^?;;ii;:7!;lT  'vr''  ""•"•'"'""  '•"■"""- "-  '-'i- 

.i.-Htv.  hHrn:     !       u"s  to     „  i         , '^  ''"*' "'  /)"'-'"/'  ''"''  "'•'■  "ritannic  .Ma- 

^>''^:i^::-z:z,.:::.:t:i  ir'^iti  sS''"^  ^'-t  .ii.jv— .nsen 

IJritannie  .NLyestv  a   ,1  >  i  I  .-vi' ,..  i  "    '"     •^'^""■^  ^"I'l  l'"'  (J-'vernment  of  H.t 
several  »e,...|s.  w    i  V.  I  .  iv  .^^^^^^^^^  "'   ""'  '«•^^«•<■"»'"tt...l  bv  the 


I    ' 


•'=^^^«|?«««flBe-3*^-< 


W^ 


■f 


02 


iHI 


if 


t  ill 


down  In  tlin  sniit  Mraty.  <lellninK  tlin  oMIuAthn^  nf  iiflutriil  ){'>vernm«nU;  nnil 
by  Artifin  7  it  l«  proviiletl  as  t'<)llr)w«:  "  'Hifl  «uiil  tiiliiiiiiil  shitll  (Irst  tlt^titrnilno 
nn  In  ciich  emsel  xciKKvifft//,  wlioilicr  (ir<-at  ilrltiiiii  liii.<«,  liy  any  net  i)r  innlR- 
sioii,  laili'tl  to  fiiKIll  iiiiy  oftlic  (Iiilic-*  nvt  lorlli  in  tlit!  fii>ri>j;oliijr  three  riil«'.<t,  or 
rtM-D^ni/.iMl  liy  till!  |iriii('i|i!cs  of  InliTimtioiiul  liiw  nut  InronftlHtiMit  witli  xiicli 
hilcH,  ii  111  mIiiiII  ctTliry  sn-h  I'lu'l  <is  h>  nwh  ofllf  Hiiiit  iirMnilH.  I,:  ca***  tlin  trl- 
biiiiiil  linil  that  (iriNit   liiitaln  Inis  lUilcil  to  tulllll    tiny  iluty  or  diitii:  ^*'or«- 

(<aiil,  it  ma//,  if  if  think  prii/xr.  iirorftil  to  iio'itnl  n  sii  n  in  iiroMn,  to  In-  paiil  hy 
OriMt  Hritain  to  the  rnil«'il  Siiitft  for  all  the  I'ltiois  n'H'nt'il  to  it."  Ami  it 
is  lurthcr  provided,  hy  Arllcitt  1".  iis  folio  wh;  " 'm  ciii'  tin-  trlh'inal  llnd  that 
(ircat  Britain  has  failt-d  to  fnlllll  any  duty  or  dutifs,  iiR  aforesaid,  and  (lot>s 
not  award  a  snni  in  i;ross,  the  hiixh  enntraotin;!  partiiM  agree  that  a  hoard  of 
assessors  Hliall  lie  apjiiiinled  to  ascertain  and  determine  ?p/iii/  cliiintu  «it  rnllit, 
and  what  anionnt  or  aniiiinils  shall  he  paid  li>  (ireal  lirltaln  to  the  Unite*! 
Slates  on  aei'onnt  o'the  liahliily  arising  from  such  failure  km  lo  ftwh  Cf»iitl, 
ac(-iir<linf{  to  the  i-xtent  of  sneh  liahilily,  as  decided  hy  the  arliitralors."' 

And  whereas  it  appears  that  ihe  damaK(>s  to  he  aM'ertained,  either  hy  tho 
nrl)itrator«  under  Article  7,  or  hy  the  assessors  nndi^r  Article  10,  are  the  satnt? 
in  their  >'ii,t,e  and  character  in  hi>ih  cases;  it  Immii);  providitd  that  the  arhi- 
trators  nniy  award  a  sum  in  uross  liirthe  claims  for  or  on  nccoiuit  of  «<{  ||i« 
vessels,  and  in  case  of  iheir  fadnre  to  do  so.  that  the  assessors  shall  make  out 
an  arnninl  of  tin-  linliililii  its  to  iitch  rrssil,  according  to  the  extent  of  such 
liahiilty,  as  dVciiled  l>y  ilie  arldtralois. 

And  wlKM'cas  it  is  e\  idcnt  that  the  paitios  to  the  treaty  did  not  intend  that 
the  assessors  should  deterniiiu'  the  <pieslion  of  indirect  damages,  ascertain  the 
anumnt  and  attempt,  to  apportion  it  amoin;  the  seveial  vessels,  charKini;  on 
account  of  till!  lialillily  as  to  ea<di  a  proportion  ol  the  daiuages,  tor  "  the  trans- 
fer of  a  iar^e  part  of  the  American  comuiercial  marine  to  the  llriiish  lias;," 
the  pnilongation  of  the  war,  Ac,  as  such  an  apportionment  would  he  luireiis- 
onalile  and  inipracticahle. 

Anil  whereas,  in  ihe  said  case  prepared  on  the  part  of  the  Government  of 
of  the  rniled  Stules,  the  proposition  is  advanced  that  a  neutral  is  hnund  to 
use  (v.tive  vigilance  and  ali  the  other  means  in  its  power  to  prevent  its  citi- 
zens from  doiim  any  of  the  acts  referied  to  in  (he  rules  I  lid  down  in  Arlicit*  tl 
of  said  treaty,  that  liy  "  due  dil','il«ci,ce  "  is  meant  "  a  «lilis;ence  which  prompts 
the  neutral  to  the  )i((ps/  do  ;•;/>/(>  iiiiiiniins  lit  ili.ii-(i,i  r  nni/  iniriKixr  nf  ilnini/ 
thf  ix-fs  fiirhiilflin,"  and  that  tin*  neutral,  in  case  of  n<  ij;li;{eiice  in  this  respect, 
is  liahle  for  all  the  direi'l  and  indiiei-t  losses  and  Injuries  whicli  may  he  sus- 
tained h>  a  heilifiereut  hy  reason  or  in  conseipience  thereof 

And  wli.reas  the  said  diK-liines  which  the  United  Slates  ire  tlius  imtd"  to 
assume  l)V  the  action  of  iheir  le<.:al  lepre-entatives  would  Impose  u|Hin  tliis 
country  new  and  onerous  ohii'jations  in  lesjH'ct  I  i  the  action  (d.Vnieriean  citi- 
zens s\mpathi/ins  witli  oppressed  races  mappliiiR  with  tyiaimy  and  with  na- 
tions lh.;htinK  lor  inde|H>ndeiice,  an<l  such  iloi  irines  are  repugnant  to  the  iiisf  i- 
lutions  and  traditions  . if  the  AuH-rlcan  jwople  who  have  alwa\  s  sympalhiwil 
even  for  the  luunlilrsi  of  the  human  tainily  when  strusulinc  lor  lilx'rt>. 

And  wherea't  insts-ad  of  increasin:,' ihe  stringency  "t  the  ohiigations  ^f  neu- 
trals recognized  hy  the  existing  lawot  nations,  the  higiiesi  iuteresis  of .  ivili- 
Y.iitUm  (leinatMl  that  the  litM'rlie>»  and  li-htsof  neutrals  shall  he  ext;  iiiicd,  and 
the  nrivileyes  and  p  iwers  of  stales  at  w  ar  diminislied  : 

U,H(,leril.  That  it  is  the  opinion  of  this  l|..use|iiat  the  said  claims  for  indi- 
rect damages  should  1m«  held  ami  consi.lered  to  Im  waiveu  hy  the  said  recited 
iutiniatii.n  of  the  American  itiiumissioniMs,  that  they  would  Ik?  waived  in 
case  ot  an  amicahie  settlement  of  th.  tiialters  in  dispote— it  lieing  clear  that 
aseltlenien!  of  those  inalters  hy  am'  under  the  awaid  ,.t  the  said  triliunal  of 
arhiir.alion  will  lie  an  aniicalile  selilemeni   !li<ie.,|;  .m. I  that  the  s»jd  claiius 

for  indirect  damages  are  im ipalihie  with   the  term  \    and  provisions  of  the 

said  weaty.  and  that  Ihe  propositions  eoniended  for  in  tue  sahl  cast',  in  res|>eci 
U)theohligai!onsof  iieutr  s  as  ahovu  roiled,  aic  unsm-nd  and  incompalihle 
with  American  prece.ient*     id  the  genius  of  our  iusiiuitions. 


[ovenimenU;  antl 
II  llr!>t  (l)'iitriiiliitt 
miY  net  or  oiiiIn- 
Ufi  llirve  riilc.H,  or 

«lst(>llt    Willi  HIK'll 

I>:  vn*o  tim  irl- 
r  tliitliv  -•hrfl- 
tisn,  to  III-  paid  liy 
il  to  it."  Ami  it 
trIlMiiml  lliiil  tliut 

'ori'!tlliil.  Hill!  (Intvs 
;■<<  that  i\  liojtl'il  ol' 
cldlmn  are  rnllil, 
nl»  to  the  IJiiltetl 
(iH  to  fitfh  ei'Mtl, 
rliitralors."' 
n'<l.  ('Iliii'r  liy  th« 
!  10,  iiri'  the  Hiuiii' 
Ittil  lliiit  III)'  itrlii- 
Ccoillil  ol'rf/{  (||i> 
!«  Sllilll   IIIIlkR   out 

10  (>xtoiit  of  such 

I  not  liiti'iiil  tliitt 
igtM,  iisotM'tain  tilt' 
M'l^,  cliiirKiiii;  on 
1.  tor  "  till'  traiiH- 
Ih!  llrilJHh  lliig," 
would  1h'  uureiM- 

l>   (ioVITIIUKMlt  of 

itial  is  liiiitud  to 
I  |ir<'vt>iit  Hn  cltl- 
lowii  ill  AniiUHl 
I-  wliieli  proiiiptH 
intrjiour  itf  ilnin;/ 
•I!  ill  this  r<>f.pi'ci. 
licit   may  l><!  sus- 

,T(!  thus  iimd"  to 

lllpOSK    U|MIII  this 

ofAnu'ricaii  rili- 
iiiy  mid  with  iia- 
iiant  to  the  iiiKti- 
I'lkNs  Kyiiipatliizi'd 
lor  lilwrt). 
Iili^ntioiis  of  iit>ii- 
Illflt'SlS  of  civili- 
Uti  t'Xt;  uclfil,  uhI 

cliiiiiis  fur  iiidi- 

tilt!  NHJd  rcoitiHl 
Id  he  wnivt-d   ill 

li('liii{  cliMr  thitt 
I'  s;iid  Iriliiiiial  of 

till'  sitid  I'laiiiis 
provisions  ofihe 
I  ciisi",  in  ivs|>wi 

lid     ilK'OlllpUtillll! 


ilSKT 


'^^^^'WBfe^Sj'^'' 


